500 words a day on whatever I want

Cavalli-Sforza on “The Bell Curve”

Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza, a Stanford geneticist, said in 1995 that “The Bell Curve” (1994) by Charles Murray and Harvard psychologist Richard J Herrnstein is wrong on the science.

Murray and Herrnstein said that IQ is about 60% genetic. That was the best value as of 1976. Since then several important papers, particularly Rice, Cloninger and Reich (1980), have come out showing that the true number is about 33%.

Cavalli-Sforza says that the best known way to to tell how much genes affect something like IQ is to do adoption studies and then run the numbers through path analysis. At first that did give a number close to 60%, but since 1980 it has been repeatedly turning out numbers close to 33%.

Cavalli-Sforza:

It is somewhat disconcerting that all these papers are totally ignored in “The Bell Curve”…. Researchers who might be called “IQ hereditarians” are in general reporting high heritabilities for IQ without any information on how these calculations have been obtained, or why the other papers here cited have been ignored. It is unlikely that they were not seen or read; they are published in well-known scientific journals.

But even if we assume that IQ is 60% genetic between parent and child, that still does not mean the difference between blacks and whites is mainly genetic.

Height, for example, seems to be much more genetic than IQ and yet people in Europe are much taller now than 200 years ago. Since there has been almost no change in the genes of Europeans in that time, the difference is pretty much 0% genetic. Despite height being highly genetic.

Murray and Herrnstein know this and admit this, yet they still say it is “likely” the difference in IQs between blacks and whites is mostly genetic.

Which is pretty strange when they themselves admit that SAT scores between blacks and whites have narrowed by 30% in the past 19 years. At that rate there will be almost no difference in 70 years. It is not as if they think the SAT is not a good rough measure of intelligence.

Cavalli-Sforza thinks almost none of the difference is genetic: both the American adoption study by Sandra Scarr and Barbara Tizard’s study of British orphans showed that when blacks and whites are brought up under the same circumstances the difference pretty much disappears.

He further points out that:

the charts are misleading,

correlation is not cause and that

the g factor is likely a statistical artefact.

He thinks IQ tests measure a small and rather uninteresting part of intelligence and that it is impossible to make one that is reasonably culture-free.

He also says that Murray and Herrnstein are racists. He is the first white author I have read who says that flat out. He says racism is:

the persuasion that some races are definitely better than others in some socially important ways, and that the difference is of genetic origin.

Murray and Herrnstein certainly think IQ is socially important, that whites have more of it and that it is mostly genetic. Therefore they are racists. Even though they talk as if racism has pretty much disappeared.

Share this post:

Like this:

213 Responses

And I would add, Cavalli-Sforza isn’t even the first to make these kinds of claims. Ashley Montagu was doing it back in the 40’s, and more importantly his research was so widely respected that he ran point for UNESCO during their, “The Race Question”.

Unfortunately, most scientific racists tend to ignore mainstream facts and pretend that marginalized trash are actually hidden gems of knowledge only they and a select few others can see. Really, it smacks of arrogance, narcissism, and old-fashioned ignorance.

I admit, I don’t know much about the science of genetics or how it works. However, I know that it’s the usual excuse for white racism against blacks and supports the white superiority/black inferiority lie for years upon years.

What those “race realists” and other junk scientists always deliberately ignore are the fundamentals of the scientific fields they dabble in. As zek mentioned, they believe (that’s the only term that applies here) they are the “enlightened” ones and all other scientists can now stop any further research. They are in fact highly delusional.

By definition, an organism is a biological entity whose building blocks are not immutable. An organism reacts to the environment it is put into. That happens not only physiologically but also genetically in surprisingly short time spans. Certain traits can be switched on or off by the environment on a genetic level. Certain developmental processes, notably cognitive abilities, can be seriously impaired by a lack of stimulus and/or healthy nutrition in early life but recovered later to a certain level. Even if it might be difficult to get back up to the full potential the individual might have had growing up under favourable conditions, it clearly shows how adaptable and flexible an organism such as a human really is.

That’s the really remarkable part. That’s also the part the pseudos wipe under the rug. To them, it’s got to be mostly hard-wired or all their theories go down the drain.

Biology and environment are indissociable. Otherwise evolution would be impossible. That is the bottom line. And that’s exactly what those pseudos choose to ignore, hoping that as many people as possible don’t know about certain fundamentals.

It’s also understandable when serious scientists are getting tired of debunking over and over again. After all, they are busy enough with proper research that might become truly beneficial for mankind. And once they open their mouths they instantly get the “PC” treatment, academic leftists conspiracy theories and so forth.

On a side note, one of my old schoolmates is a psychiatrist. When I first mentioned HBD, “race realists” etc to him, he said – that’s fascinating, if you ever meet any in person, send them to my office.

On a side note, one of my old schoolmates is a psychiatrist. When I first mentioned HBD, “race realists” etc to him, he said – that’s fascinating, if you ever meet any in person, send them to my office.

LOL!

Great post Abagond! I admit I haven’t really read much about the science surrounding race, but your blog posts have definitely persuaded me to stop being so ignorant and read those damn books already.

I wanted to know your thoughts on why middle class blacks have lower SAT scores on average than poor whites(I personally still haven’t seen this study).

Virtually all of the studies checking for heritability of intelligence have been done on middle class and wealthy twins. Several recent twin studies from psychologist Eric Turkheimer and others have shown that the heritability of IQ among those at the lower end of the socio-economic spectrum is only .10 on a scale of 1-10 and .75 on the same scale for those at the higher end. To me this proves that we do not know the potential intelligence of poor/lower middle income Blacks and this whole race & IQ argument is nonsense. For me this crushes the arguments of the Bell Curve. The Burakumin already show that you can have an group IQ gap of at least 15-16 pts. within the same race/ethnic group.

So the question is why are middle class Blacks are coming up short? Before you give me your opinion I do want to link some articles discussing these studies that have tested for heritability among high and low SES twins.

My opinions mimic Ferguson’s closely. Personally I feel the main culprit is Black culture. Many of our kids are growing up in single parent households which don’t put an emphasis on the importance of education and delayed gratification. Although, I do believe culture does not fall from the sky. Whenever you marginalize, exclude a group from society(politically, economically, socially) I believe it is only naturally for that group to fall off a bit. This is why I believe so many traditionally oppressed groups around the planet have lower socio-economic statuses than other groups in their respective societies. The second reason for the gap is that even in the same class with similar income and education whites still have five times more wealth.

Oh and I forgot to mention that income doesn’t matter much when you go to school with many low income children. I believe this is another environmental factor that contributes to the achievement gap(even among poor whites & middle class blks).

“Schools with lots of poverty-level children often have less-qualified teachers, as one study of 1450 Virginia schools found. And even after controlling for poverty , having less-qualified teachers predicted lower achievement scores (Tuerk, 2005).(Myers 431)

Wait, does this mean the gap narrowed further within this process of narrowing? Or did it narrow widen and than narrow again?

I mean within the 1970s & 80s the amount of Blks in higher education nearly doubled, in 1977 it was about equal, and by the late 1980s the high school graduation rate of blacks & whites was near identical. I see no reason why we can’t continue to make progress after years of forced racial inequality within this country.

HBDers can’t even be sure how inheritable intelligence is bc psychologist themselves don’t even seem to agree. I don’t even believe you can compare groups when it comes to genetic traits. I think we all know of the example with the genetically identical seeds growing to varying heights when planted in different soils. Height seems to be more genetic than intelligence(75-90%) and yet North and South Koreans differ on average height by a full 6 inches(Pak, 2004; Schwekendiek, 2008).

Either way I believe HDBers are going to believe what they want no matter what. Many of them have political motives tied to dreams of race supremacy. Actual science seems to be the least of their worries.

Hi Abagond,
You know, I am really having trouble with those who come at this thing like you do.

I simply do not see why it is so very hard for folks on your side of the aisle to deal with the fundamental premise of The Bell Curve – that we are becoming a bifurcated society along class lines that have a great deal to do with “knowledge workers” and everyone else. Whether that be due to genetics, social causes, whatever, that is definitely the case and should really be our focus as we move into the 21st century. The simple fact of the matter is that everyone will NOT be born an Einstein, just like everyone won’t be born to be in the NBA, or an operatic singer. We readily can admit the latter two; why is it so very hard for us to just admit the former and get on with the very real work and challenge of what we are going to do with those among us who don’t have a meangingful place in our society, one that is built upon information networks and caters to what Richard Florida calls “The Creative Class”? I really, really, would like to see some discussion along those lines, Abagond, because, if we’re willing to be brutally honest, that’s where the rubber hits the road for many Black folks.

As for the motivations of those who wrote TBC, them being racists and so forth – so what? Wagner was anti-Semetic – does that mean that his compositions weren’t any good as a result? I mean, aren’t we all adults here – can’t we evaluate an idea based on its own merits and take it from there? It seems to me that the answer to that question is “no”, because while there is a tremendous amount of focus on the methodology, the science and so forth, what Murray said is still significant in many ways, and our refusal to honestly grapple with that – I mean Black folks now – some 15 years on since the first publication of TBC – is striking.

Consider the following: roughly half – HALF – of ALL Black boys, dropout of highschool, Abagond. Now, we can attribute this to any number of things; but the bottomline is this: we either address that, or it addresses us. We know what this means insofar as its impacts on the Black dating/mating market alone, to say nothing about the health of the Black family, Black economic health, and so forth. Many of the productive outlets, like the Trades, have long vanished in largely Black areas. And one of those reasons is because of the cultural attitudes many Blacks in our time have towards the Trades. And they’re not alone – Whites have the same attitudes. Please don’t try to fight me on this, the evidence is astounding. I am here to say that perhaps its possible that we have gotten away from the kinds of education that is geared more for those with a tradeschool bent, and not for an info-tech one, and that we need to get back to that. But in order for that to happen, we need to make being in the trades “sexy” again, because at present, no one thinks it does. Regardless as to what Murray or anyone else does or doesn’t think about Black folks, this is a very serious issue, Abagond.

Black kids consistently score lower on tests, even when taking class and family income into account. Just about every measure confirms this, military testing, John Ogbu’s studies, you name it. Again, we can go round and round arguing what the causes of this or the motivations of those who point these ugly truths out are, but the fact of the matter is that White and Asian kids who come from poorer backgrounds usually ace more well-heeled Black kids, and Black Males score lower on military tests than do Whites. How do we address that? I mean, really?

Did Obsidian just ask the question of “Why blacks fail?”, continuing on in saying it was because the culture and its effect towards education, and follow through with the solution of going back down the route of tradeskills?

Only to temporarily forget that he just gave a realistic solution, when he asked “why” again?

I promised the Cynic to do a post on the black achievement gap later this week. I think that is the right place to talk about this. So save your ammo for then. On this thread it is pretty much a derailment. If you have any online articles or blog posts to suggest, I will gladly read them before I write my post.

I agree it is a very serious issue. I have never for one second said otherwise. I have children in American public schools so it affects me directly. But I do not want to just mouth off and vent, as satisfying as that would be.

“The simple fact of the matter is that everyone will NOT be born an Einstein, just like everyone won’t be born to be in the NBA, or an operatic singer. ”

You’ve said this same thing multiple times on this blog. It’s a true statement. But would you please, please, please explain why you think it’s a race specific issue. Trust me, there are a whole lot of dumb ass white people walking around.

Yes some people are smarter than others and those people will probably be more successful. I’m 100% OK with that. What i’m not OK with is the idea that whites are inherently smarter than blacks and that there is some genetic reason why blacks are not well represented in the more successful tiers of society.

I have to say that not much in those studies is really surprising. This is not to depreciate anything but to emphasise that it is directly plausible.

It can also explain the underachievement of usually poorer North Africans, Turks, Middle Easterners etc in Europe. People who would be classified “Caucasoid” by “race realists”.

Talking about heritability of intelligence, I have encountered families where both parents were highly intelligent and only half of their kids reached the same level of achievement. I have seen intelligent parents with dull kids. “Intelligent parents” in terms of their academic and professional achievements but otherwise stressed out, irritable, aloof and with no sense for a healthy balance between work and life.

There are also many examples of parents with average intelligence who have brilliant kids. In fact most of those childhood geniuses come from fairly average households.

Wagner was anti-Semetic – does that mean that his compositions weren’t any good as a result?

Correct me if I’m wrong but I don’t recall having read anything about Wagner attempting to “scientifically” prove that Jews are genetically predisposed to be hated by others. AFAIK he always remained in his domain which is music.

The simple fact of the matter is that everyone will NOT be born an Einstein, just like everyone won’t be born to be in the NBA, or an operatic singer.

The simple fact of the matter is that everyone will NOT be born a post office clerk, a housewife, a chemist, a policeman, a janitor etc, you name it.

J: You’ve said this same thing multiple times on this blog. It’s a true statement. But would you please, please, please explain why you think it’s a race specific issue. Trust me, there are a whole lot of dumb ass white people walking around.

O: Yes, there are. But the fact of the matter is, that for better or for worse, people are tribal, and this is no more true than in the USA, the most diverse nation on the planet. It is something that is ingrained in us, and it is not practical or pragmatic to expect people to simply get over it. They won’t. Moreover, when it comes to certain things – like violent street crime, or out of wedlock births and fatherless homes – Blacks do indeed lead in those areas and thus, it becomes a race specific issue. And we need to spend more time addressing that, rather than our sensibilities being offended.

J: Yes some people are smarter than others and those people will probably be more successful. I’m 100% OK with that. What i’m not OK with is the idea that whites are inherently smarter than blacks and that there is some genetic reason why blacks are not well represented in the more successful tiers of society.

O: So what? So what if Whites ARE smarter than Blacks? SO WHAT? What does that have to do with the issues I just mentioned above, Jason? How does that address the fact that HALF OF ALL BLACK BOYS ARE DROPPING OUT OF SCHOOL? Please explain that to me?

About Wagner, I think it was Zubin Mehta who once conducted music of Wagner in Jerusalem with the local philharmonics. The reason: it was about the time to get that music away from the clutches of herr Hitler.

F: Correct me if I’m wrong but I don’t recall having read anything about Wagner attempting to “scientifically” prove that Jews are genetically predisposed to be hated by others. AFAIK he always remained in his domain which is music.

O: So what; the fact of the matter was that he was indeed an anti-Semite. Period. Yet his views don’t have anything to do with his operatic works.

The fact(?) that Murray et al may be racists, or for that matter the fact(?) that their book may be methoologically flawed has nothing to do with the premise they’ve laidout in said book, nor my “take” on it as experssed in the comments above and previously on this blog and elsewhere. The whole discussion seems to be centered around arguing over how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, instead of simply rolling up our sleeves, casting down our buckets where we are, and getting on with it.

“The simple fact of the matter is that everyone will NOT be born an Einstein, just like everyone won’t be born to be in the NBA, or an operatic singer.”

F: The simple fact of the matter is that everyone will NOT be born a post office clerk, a housewife, a chemist, a policeman, a janitor etc, you name it.

O: Yes, that’s true; but you failed to include the rest of my statement, which was the following:

“We readily can admit the latter two; why is it so very hard for us to just admit the former and get on with the very real work and challenge of what we are going to do with those among us who don’t have a meangingful place in our society, one that is built upon information networks and caters to what Richard Florida calls “The Creative Class”?”

Why do you refuse to grapple honestly with that statement, Femi? Please explain?

A: I promised the Cynic to do a post on the black achievement gap later this week. I think that is the right place to talk about this. So save your ammo for then. On this thread it is pretty much a derailment. If you have any online articles or blog posts to suggest, I will gladly read them before I write my post.

O: No need, what I noted is a matter of public record, everybody knows the deal, we just aren’t supposed to notice or talk about it in polite company. Cosby, anyone?

And with all due respect, you have yet to tackle honestly such things as violent street crime, out of wedlock births among Blacks etc et al, WITHOUT RECOURSE TO ANYTHING WHITE, in the several years I’ve been reading this blog. At some point you just have to look at things in life dead in the ey and call it like it is.

A: I agree it is a very serious issue. I have never for one second said otherwise.

O: You have yet to say anything.

A: I have children in American public schools so it affects me directly. But I do not want to just mouth off and vent, as satisfying as that would be.

O: Why not? You’ve been venting about The Bell Curve for easily the past few months. Why pull up short now?

F: Did Obsidian just ask the question of “Why blacks fail?”, continuing on in saying it was because the culture and its effect towards education, and follow through with the solution of going back down the route of tradeskills?

O: In a manner of speaking, yes, I did. Do you agree or disagree with what I said?

F: Only to temporarily forget that he just gave a realistic solution, when he asked “why” again?

O: The issue isn’t what i’m saying in this regard, it is why others here aren’t even speaking on it at all. Your guess?

O: So what; the fact of the matter was that he was indeed an anti-Semite. Period. Yet his views don’t have anything to do with his operatic works.

That’s exactly what I said. His music was his professional field, not biology, not genetics.

The fact(?) that Murray et al may be racists, or for that matter the fact(?) that their book may be methoologically flawed has nothing to do with the premise they’ve laidout in said book, nor my “take” on it as experssed in the comments above and previously on this blog and elsewhere. The whole discussion seems to be centered around arguing over how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, instead of simply rolling up our sleeves, casting down our buckets where we are, and getting on with it.

I beg your pardon?

“The Creative Class”?”

The potential to untapped genius is lurking everywhere, in all walks of life. What gives people the arrogance to limit it to their own perimetre of perception?

Hi Cynic,
Yes, I am very well acquainted with the sources of the links you provided. In fact, just about every counterargument there is against The Bell Curve, I have either read or heard about, and for what it’s worth I think some of them are legitimate. None of that actually addresses the premise of the book, nor my takes on same – as per usual.

F: That’s exactly what I said. His music was his professional field, not biology, not genetics.

O: Neither of the authors of The Bell Curve claimed to be geneticists; their book was an examination of the bifcuration of American life along cognitive class lines, and what is to be done about that. I take particular interest in the fact that since the book’s publication, NO ONE has actually addressed that point.

“The fact(?) that Murray et al may be racists, or for that matter the fact(?) that their book may be methoologically flawed has nothing to do with the premise they’ve laidout in said book, nor my “take” on it as experssed in the comments above and previously on this blog and elsewhere. The whole discussion seems to be centered around arguing over how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, instead of simply rolling up our sleeves, casting down our buckets where we are, and getting on with it. ”

F: I beg your pardon?

O: I didn’t stutter. You read me right.

“The Creative Class”?”

O: Yes. That is Florida’s idea of the kinds of people The Bell Curve addresses. Do you have a problem with that phrase? Are you familair with who he is? Have you read his book(s)?

F: The potential to untapped genius is lurking everywhere, in all walks of life. What gives people the arrogance to limit it to their own perimetre of perception?

O: Things like the SAT, conscientiousness, highschool completion rates, etc et al. Yes, these are inherently imperfect measures, and there will always be exceptions to any rule in life. Yet they are purposeful, and it does none of us any good to keep trying to dodge that fact of life.

“None of that actually addresses the premise of the book, nor my takes on same – as per usual.”

To be honest I don’t care about the fundamental premise of the book. All I care about is the part that suggest most of the IQ gap between Black & White Americans is genetic. Hopefully you will find someone to discuss America’s transforming society with you. I have other things to worry about at the moment.

The fact(?) that Murray et al may be racists, or for that matter the fact(?) that their book may be methoologically flawed has nothing to do with the premise they’ve laidout in said book, nor my “take” on it as experssed in the comments above and previously on this blog and elsewhere. The whole discussion seems to be centered around arguing over how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, instead of simply rolling up our sleeves, casting down our buckets where we are, and getting on with it.

O: Neither of the authors of The Bell Curve claimed to be geneticists; their book was an examination of the bifcuration of American life along cognitive class lines, and what is to be done about that. I take particular interest in the fact that since the book’s publication, NO ONE has actually addressed that point.

And again, Obsidian comes in FTL with his patented version of fisking that completely derails the conversation =/

Sometimes I think people who argue randomly at will are just spoiling for a fight to prove something to themselves because nobody else will validate it for them…

Anyhoo, I think debating the science behind a lot of the prejudice in America is important, because while attempts to legislate equality are well and good, people will rebel against it if their ideas are still, well… racist.

Take for example the Tea Baggers: all angry people who have twisted ideas about America, and thus resist any structural attempts to change the system in a way which would actually benefit them.

I feel the same way for People of Color. No matter how much affirmative action we have, or diversity requirements we impose, or how much White Guilt we lay on The Man, there will still be problems because, to paraphrase Biggie Smalls, we cannot change the world unless we change ourselves.

It’s important that we combat racism on every level — not just the ones that seem more interesting to certain individuals who have too much time on their hands.

C: To be honest I don’t care about the fundamental premise of the book.

O: Yes, that much is clear, and oddly sounding like one who hasn’t in fact, read it, from Wikipedia: “The Bell Curve is a best-selling but controversial 1994 book by the deceased Harvard psychologist Richard J. Herrnstein and American Enterprise Institute political scientist Charles Murray. Its central argument is that intelligence is substantially influenced by both genetics and environment and a better predictor of many personal dynamics, including financial income, job performance, chance of unwanted pregnancy, and involvement in crime than are an individual’s parental socioeconomic status, or education level. The book also argues that those with high intelligence, the “cognitive elite”, are becoming separated from those of average and below-average intelligence, and that this is a dangerous social trend.”

Are we learning yet?

C: All I care about is the part that suggest most of the IQ gap between Black & White Americans is genetic.

O: Then you’ll be interested in the following, again, from the Wikipedia entry on The Bell Curve:
“Most of the controversy concerns Chapters 13 and 14, in which the authors wrote about racial differences in intelligence and discuss the implications of those differences. The authors were reported throughout the popular press as arguing that these IQ differences are genetic, and they did indeed write in chapter 13: “It seems highly likely to us that both genes and the environment have something to do with racial differences.” The introduction to the chapter more cautiously states, “The debate about whether and how much genes and environment have to do with ethnic differences remains unresolved.”

Please do keep in mind what the quotation marks have contained therein? Also, please keep in mind that said remarks are only a small slice of the overall book. Surely, you’re smart enough to know that nothing can be evaluated properly without seeing them within context?

C: Hopefully you will find someone to discuss America’s transforming society with you.

O: Abagond says such a rip-roarin’ discussion is on the way…

C: I have other things to worry about at the moment.

O: Given the way you argue your points, you have goodly cause for concern…

C: Just so you know. My reminder has nothing to do with attacking your comment. I just saw a few things that were a bit… off, to me.

O: I certainly hope not; attacking points when you don’t even know what you’re talking about looks…so uncivilized.

O: Most of the time. Do you? The Bell Curve isn’t an academic text, per se, but one meant for the general public to engender a broader public discussion and discourse, much as Germany Abolishes Itself is doing right now over in Germany as we speak. Funny then, how so many are so deeply resistant to doing just that…

“Neither of the authors of The Bell Curve claimed to be geneticists…”

F: No further questions, your honour.

O: Objection! Strawman argument.

Now, would like to redirect the witness to FOCUS, like a laserbeam…

“Consider the following: roughly half – HALF – of ALL Black boys, dropout of highschool, Abagond. Now, we can attribute this to any number of things; but the bottomline is this: we either address that, or it addresses us. We know what this means insofar as its impacts on the Black dating/mating market alone, to say nothing about the health of the Black family, Black economic health, and so forth. Many of the productive outlets, like the Trades, have long vanished in largely Black areas. And one of those reasons is because of the cultural attitudes many Blacks in our time have towards the Trades. And they’re not alone – Whites have the same attitudes. Please don’t try to fight me on this, the evidence is astounding. I am here to say that perhaps its possible that we have gotten away from the kinds of education that is geared more for those with a tradeschool bent, and not for an info-tech one, and that we need to get back to that. But in order for that to happen, we need to make being in the trades “sexy” again, because at present, no one thinks it does. Regardless as to what Murray or anyone else does or doesn’t think about Black folks, this is a very serious issue, Abagond.”

@Obsidian
Your first comment doesn’t say much about the actual content within Aba’s post so I want to ask you…

What do you exactly disagree w/ about Abagond’s post? Did Cavilli-Sforza say something that you feel is incorrect?

-Do you have an argument against the fundamental scientific principle that correlation does not equal causation?
-Do you have any evidence that suggest “The Bell Curves” graphs are accurate and not misleading?
-Just how inheritable do you believe intelligence is? I know you said something about not everyone can be an NBA player or opera singer, but what is your fact-based counter-argument to the number of 33% heritability?
_____________________________________________
Everybody here is aware of the IQ gap. No one has any troubles grappling with black pathologies. What we are discussing is just how much IQ is attributable to genetics.

I already gave the example of North & South Koreans. Height is 75-90%, much more so than intelligence, yet there is a full 6 inch difference between the height of the average North & South Korean. <–simple facts like these are the EXACT reason why debates about nature vs nurture are ongoing. The presence of a 15-16pt IQ gap between the social minority Burakumin of Japan and majority Japanese(who are of the same race/ethnic group/genetic population) is just one more reason why ppl aren't so quick to jump to race as the culprit behind the gap.

Z: Anyhoo, I think debating the science behind a lot of the prejudice in America is important, because while attempts to legislate equality are well and good, people will rebel against it if their ideas are still, well… racist.

O: Sure; but, see, here’s the problem Zekie. Lean close now – *whispering* The Bell Curve isn’t a scientific book. It’s a…wait for it… PUBLIC POLICY book. It raises about the social ordering of American life at the close of the 20th century and the beginning of the 21st, and one of its authors, Charles Murray, has indeed influenced public policy, though not with the particular book under examination. Look it up, you’ll see what I’m talking about. It is the social questions and public policy implications that most interest me and if Congressional votes have anything to say about it, so do MILLIONS of Americans. Come on in and join the party! We’re just getting started…

Z: Take for example the Tea Baggers: all angry people who have twisted ideas about America, and thus resist any structural attempts to change the system in a way which would actually benefit them.

O: Last time I checked, the Tea Party’s platform revolved around shrinking gov’t and limiting gov’t spending; I suppose one could call that “twisted” if one wishes. Personally, I think it’s just foaming at the mouth MoveOn-ism. Zekie, tell me – are you familiar with the fact that there is now a Black Tea Party? Yup, stranger things have happened, I know. Does this mean that they are “sellout Uncle Toms”?

Z: I feel the same way for People of Color. No matter how much affirmative action we have, or diversity requirements we impose, or how much White Guilt we lay on The Man, there will still be problems because, to paraphrase Biggie Smalls, we cannot change the world unless we change ourselves.

O: Hmm, not familiar with that sage insight putatively from Biggie; I always thought he said, “mo money, mo problems”?

Z: It’s important that we combat racism on every level — not just the ones that seem more interesting to certain individuals who have too much time on their hands.

O: I have no problem with “combatting racism” in the least. Indeed, nothing I said had anything to do fostering racism. What I am talking about though, is addressing what longstanding problems that have become synonymous with the words “African American”. And the pat platitudes simply ain’t cutting it anymore.

I want solutions. Even if that means I gotta deal with some un-PC truths to get at them.

C: Your first comment doesn’t say much about the actual content within Aba’s post so I want to ask you…

What do you exactly disagree w/ about Abagond’s post? Did Cavilli-Sforza say something that you feel is incorrect?

O: I disagree with the overall arc of his many posts on the topic, which simply, flatly refuses to actually focus on what The Bell Curve is saying: WHAT ARE WE GONNA DO WITH THE NOT SO BRIGHT PEOPLE??? Quite a few, just might – just might – look like him and me? That’s the discussion I’m not hearing, and I think it is way past due that we began to take it seriously.

-Do you have an argument against the fundamental scientific principle that correlation does not equal causation?

O: No.

-Do you have any evidence that suggest “The Bell Curves” graphs are accurate and not misleading?

O: Not particularly. But then I never claimed to be a scientist.

-Just how inheritable do you believe intelligence is? I know you said something about not everyone can be an NBA player or opera singer, but what is your fact-based counter-argument to the number of 33% heritability?

O: I have none; I am approaching this as a laymen. Do you agree or disagree with my statement that not everyone will be born with the ability to make it in the NBA or at the Metropolitan Opera, or not?
_____________________________________________
C: Everybody here is aware of the IQ gap. No one has any troubles grappling with black pathologies. What we are discussing is just how much IQ is attributable to genetics.

O: Yes, and that discussion has been taking place eversince Abagond’s first posted on The Bell Curve, which was from last year. When are such intrepid souls actually gonna grapple with stuff that matters?

C: I already gave the example of North & South Koreans. Height is 75-90%, much more so than intelligence, yet there is a full 6 inch difference between the height of the average North & South Korean. <–simple facts like these are the EXACT reason why debates about nature vs nurture are ongoing. The presence of a 15-16pt IQ gap between the social minority Burakumin of Japan and majority Japanese(who are of the same race/ethnic group/genetic population) is just one more reason why ppl aren't so quick to jump to race as the culprit behind the gap.

O: But as The Bell Curve itself asserts, no one is denying the importance or role of environment. What seems to be deeply taboo however, is the notion that ANYTHING is attributable to genetics, unless of course, it's something more PC-approved, like homosexuality, or obsesity, and so forth; then, all of a sudden, it's "cool" to cite genetics. But the mere mention of the possibility, however remote, that, you know, we mite not have that many Black Nobel Prize winners in physics, because Black folks ain't that smart, and all of a sudden, we have people fainting from heart palpitations, LOL. SO WHAT?!? What does that have to do with the things I said earlier? What does that have to do with the fundamental Civil Rights of American citizens? Did having superior intelligence prevent the Jews from nearly being exterminated? Of course not – so why is all this resistance from the mere suggestion of such a thing as what we're taking about here?

Something interesting about the debate between Bell-Curvians and the rest of the scientific community (particularly Cavalli-Sforza) is that TBC attempts to solicit bunches of names to support their position, instead of letting the evidence speak for itself.

Meanwhile, the bulk of scholarly and scientific research asks for no signatories to reinforce them, and freely submits itself to peer-review.

It reminds me of the way Creationists attempt to get Intelligent Design accepted as “real science” by first undermining the prevailing consensus through portraying facts as being hotly contested and under debate, while simultaneously positing their version as some sort of hidden, maligned knowledge. You see this a lot in individuals with a big Pariah-Complex.

In much the same way, HBDers and race-realists attempt to do this with race, genetics, and IQ. And so much of it revolves around buzzwords like, “PC”, “Leftist”, “Liberals”, and other conspiratorial, ambiguous entities. Ask them to define these people and suddenly they can’t.

Basically, they’re trying to hijack science in the same way that people hijack religion to promote their agenda. The problem is: unlike in religion, science is far less open to interpretation.

Which is why they so often fail.

But nonetheless, these ideas get promulgated among people, and float around the cultural zeitgeist. Merely because they were posited in the first place. And that brings us back to that quote Abagond gave by Baldwin.

Apparently a large segment of America needs Black people to be inferior, and the only way to combat that is to disabuse them of that notion — through science, through legislation, and through changing our ideas.

***Cavalli-Sforza thinks almost none of the difference is genetic: both the American adoption study by Sandra Scarr and Barbara Tizard’s study of British orphans showed that when blacks and whites are brought up under the same circumstances the difference pretty much disappears.***

Cavalli-Sforza fails to mention the follow up results at age 17. Genetic influences on traits like IQ increase as people mature. Heritability estimates calculated on infant samples are as low as 20%, rising to around 40% in middle childhood, and ultimately as high as 80% in adult samples in the United States.R. Plomin et al.Behavioral Genetics (4th edn ed.),

In the Tizard study they looked a 4 year old and there wasn’t a follow up in adolescence or adulthood.

In the Minnessota Transracial Adoption study (the Scarr study) at age 7 the adoptees with two white parents averaged an IQ of 112, mixed race 109, and two black parents 97.

At age 17 the averages were White adoptees, 106; Mixed-Race adoptees, 99; and Black adoptees, 89.

In a 1998 article study co-author Sandra Scarr wrote:

“The test performance of the Black/Black adoptees [in the study] was not different from that of ordinary Black children reared by their own families in the same area of the country. My colleagues and I reported the data accurately and as fully as possible, and then tried to make the results palatable to environmentally committed colleagues. In retrospect, this was a mistake. The results of the transracial adoption study can be used to support either a genetic difference hypothesis or an environmental difference one (because the children have visible African ancestry). We should have been agnostic on the conclusions; Art would have been.”

@Obsidian
What do you exactly disagree w/ about Abagond’s post? Did Cavilli-Sforza say something that you feel is incorrect?

O: I disagree with the overall arc of his many posts on the topic, which simply, flatly refuses to actually focus on what The Bell Curve is saying: WHAT ARE WE GONNA DO WITH THE NOT SO BRIGHT PEOPLE??? Quite a few, just might – just might – look like him and me? That’s the discussion I’m not hearing, and I think it is way past due that we began to take it seriously.

You didn’t answer my question directly, but that’s okay.

If you want to discuss the issue you proposed then I suggest emailing bloggers to post about it, writing about the topic yourself, or actually lobbying your Representative in Congress about public policy concerning this issue.

You cannot get mad that few are discussing this aspect of the book if you make no or subtle initiatives to bring the topic to the forefront. Remember many people are individualist who don’t really care how low IQ manage in society, as long is they’re good everything is ok. You may disagree with these ppl, but they aren’t going away.

I should also mention that w/o a consensus on the precise relationship between nature & nurture when it comes to intelligence, sorting out the “not so bright” and “currently not so bright, but potentially bright” ppl isn’t going to be an easy task. This makes carrying out actual public policy toward this issue near impossible.

Just imagine a one government Korea assuming that bc height is highly inheritable all North Koreans are throw away people. Their proposed public policy decision is to exterminate all short ppl, of which a disproportion amount of North Koreans will be affected by. This is an extreme case, but it just shows how a group of people with enough potential are wrongly affected by public policy based off the assumption that they are not equal to another group.

O:Do you agree or disagree with my statement that not everyone will be born with the ability to make it in the NBA or at the Metropolitan Opera, or not?

Yes, I agree with that.

O:What seems to be deeply taboo however, is the notion that ANYTHING is attributable to genetics, unless of course, it’s something more PC-approved, like homosexuality, or obsesity, and so forth; then, all of a sudden, it’s “cool” to cite genetics.

No one here believes intelligence is not at least partly genetic. NO ONE. Not the HDBers or those who disagree with them. Everyone has the right to agree or disagree with a certain opinion. Nothing here is taboo. If you haven’t noticed many of the commenters on this blog have very different and often opposing views. They may argue and think of those who disagrees with them as the Devil, but that is not what matters. The point is they have the right to debate and that is what they do. Not everyone is going to agree or even respect you for your opinion. That is just life. Ad-hominem attacks and claims disguised as facts are generally looked down upon.

I also want to note that not everyone here believes individual differences are comparable to group differences.

“If genetic influences help explain individual diversity traits such as aggressiveness, can the same be said of group differences between men and women , or between people of different races? Not necessarily. Individual differences in height and weight, for example, are HIGHLY inheritable; yet nutritional rather than genetic influences explain why, as a group, today’s adults are taller and heavier than those of a century ago. The two groups differ, but not because human genes have changed in a mere century’s eyeblink of time.

As with height and weight, so with personality and intelligence scores: Heritable individual differences need not imply heritable group differences.”(Myers 138-139)

LOL. I see Zekie’s doing his hear no evil/see no evil/speak no evil routine again. Aww…

But the truth is, that, like I’ve said earlier, Murray et al, have indeed influenced the public discourse on these and related issues. For example, his book Losing Ground, greatly informed the Welfare Reform debate of the 1990s, which was passed by both houses of a GOP-led Congress and signed into law by a Democratic president in Bill Clinton – the same Clinton who was deemed as “the first Black president” because his association with and popularity among African Americans was so very strong. It was this same Clinton who said during one of his State of the Union addresses that “the era of big gov’t is over” and here part of that “big” meant Welfare, which yes, is associated with the word “Black” in the minds of millions of Americans. Right or wrong, it IS. and perceptions, well, they matter. They. Just. Do.

So, we can continue to duck our widdle heads in the sand, but that doesn’t actually solve some hardheaded problems, like this one:

WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO WITH THE NOT SO BRIGHT PEOPLE? A goodly portion of whom may very well be Black?
It used to be that you had a job waiting for you in the factory or the mill, but that hasn’t been the case for sometime – and even under the best of conditions, errbody won’t make it to Harvard, Yale, Princeton. Nor is the fact that more is being spent on Black students in public school districts like Newark NJ, or Washington DC, gonna change the fact that they still have atrocious highschool graduation rates. And so on. I for one am completely willing to consider the fact that maybe all Black folk won’t be the next Amy Chuas, but that doesn’t mean they can’t be good citizens and live decent, meaningful lives as tradesmen. We need to be brutally frank about this, and talk about bringing things like that back – things that are tangible, that can actually make a difference. Because, and this is the part no one really wants to dscuss, and I mean Black America now, is that what has happened over the past three or four decades is that bifurcation that The Bell Curve talks about along cognitive lines, has taken place in spades in Black America – and all of this is covered in Eugene Robinson’s book Disintergration. In fact, he calls the group that I am addressing right now “the Abondoned” and he would be right to call them that, because in many ways, they are. The HBO drama The Wire shows this in vivid detail, and while it would be great to consider the prospect of another Ben Carson waiting to be discovered in B’More’s slums, the greater likelihood is that such folks, if they’re given the chance, are more likely to become just good folk. The Black middle class has pretty much left these folk behind, and part of that whole ball of wax just mite have to do with some of the things The Bell Curve was talking about. I’m willing to consider that possibility.

In Murray’s other book, Real Education, he argues that far too many people are entering college now, who don’t belong there, but that too many parents are too vested in the notion that their kid is “special”, and the trades have been so degraded and shat on by the public at large. Again, Black America has a huge role to play in this, and this anti-trades sentiment goes all the way back to the Booker T. Washington/WEB DuBois debates (which I referred to earlier). I think we need to revist the fact that Washington was onto something there.

Personally, I think one reason why we never get to discussions like that is because the people who refuse to go there tend to be OF the very class The Bell Curve talks about – the cognitive elite – and they tend to live in a fishbowl for the most part. They only associate with, live among, marry, go to school with and work with their “own”; folks like the westside of B’More, or inner city DC, they tend to assidiously avoid. Sure, Abagond’s got kids in the NYC public schools, but I don’t if they’re the same schools where the graduation rate for Black Males is barely 50%. I want to talk about that, and since Abagond is a Black blogger who discusses Black issues it astounds me that he has yet to tackle this and related issues, head on. What is up with that? Well, Abagond might say, he doesn’t want to deal with such things because it might make Black folks look bad, and/or give White Meanies more ammo with which to do Black folks in. SO WHAT, is what I say to that line of reason (and Abagond has indeed used this “defence” in the recent past, btw, to preclude any kinds of brutally honest discussion about these and related issues, ala Bill Cosby). – the issue here is to first, get the issues on the table, WITHOUT RECOURSE TO RACISM, WHITE FOLKS, ETC ET AL, and then deal with them. Period. That, would be real progress for a change.

Now, Abagond’s up there in NYC, not too far from my hometown, Philly; I’ve lived in his town. We both see the same things on the street, day in and day out. And he knows, as much as I do, what Black folk say about all that.

Have you given up on the idea of discussing any of the information directly related to this post or are you going to continue to whine about the content that Abagond is writing about on HIS OWN blog?

You’ve basically written the same comment about 5 different times. I recommend simply suggesting a topic for Abagond to blog about and calling it a day. I don’t think all of these lengthy comments saying the same thing in different words are needed

This stuff about “What to do about the black cognitive underclass” is getting way off topic. I am going to delete further comments on the matter. Those who want to keep talking about it can move to the Open Thread or even the main Bell Curve post:

Let’s put it this way – before any further discussion can have any meaningful common ground, define “race” in humans in scientific terms first. That is, unambiguously and universal throughout the world, not only the USA.

Obsidian: I’m not sure if you read this upthread, but there is another post coming up about the achievement gap. And another thing: Abagond told you to hold all your comments regarding the achievement gap until it comes up.

So would you please either talk about the subject at hand or wait and stop talking altogether? Because it’s extremely irritating, and it’s not helping anyone.

***the persuasion that some races are definitely better than others in some socially important ways, and that the difference is of genetic origin.***

I suppose that is why Cavalli-Sforza had to abort his proposed Inuit study in the mid 80’s, which would have investigated whether natural selection favors different mental toolkits in hunting and gathering societies versus agricultural societies.

He would have been getting too close to looking at whether populations might vary in socially important ways, due to gene-culture co evolution.

C: Have you given up on the idea of discussing any of the information directly related to this post or are you going to continue to whine about the content that Abagond is writing about on HIS OWN blog?

O: LOL. Now I’m “whining” when I am merely pointing out what we all know to be true and staring us right in the face, and unlike the current discussion, doesn’t require one to be a geneticist to discuss it intelligently. Nice!

C: You’ve basically written the same comment about 5 different times. I recommend simply suggesting a topic for Abagond to blog about and calling it a day. I don’t think all of these lengthy comments saying the same thing in different words are needed

O: Abagond has about half a dozen posts specifically geared toward The Bell Curve, and ALL OF THEM are exactly like this one, ie, they all center on the “science”. Which is fine – I am asking, WHY doesn’t he EVER have any posts dealing with the topics I mentioned above, ala Bill Cosby style? I just find that fascinating, given that he is a Black blogger (as am I) yet assiduously avoids these issues, unless he can find a way to work White folks in it somehow.

Don’t you?

O.

PS: For the record, I have no problem with Cavalli-Sforza’s work or his counter-arguments to The Bell Curve; in fact, I fully endorse his and any other scholar’s right to disagree, vociferously argue, etc, et al. Sforza isn’t an American, nor is his area of expertise in urban affairs or public policy, and I think this is something that we would do well to keep in mind. Also, in case Halisi’s reading along – this is more than about the “achievement gap’ – it’s about that whole range of things that Cosby talked about that Blacks like Abagond want to assiduously avoid but is doing no good, because we now live in an age where everyone sees our dirty laundry whether we like it or not and have the choice of either getting out in front on things like that, or others, who may not have our best interests in heart, can and will.

@Schwartz: Again, you’re ignoring Cavalli-Sforza’s own intention behind his work. Like Doug1 you seem to think that he’s secretly down for the cause — except he isn’t.

Cavalli-Sforza is all about disabusing people of the notion that race, genetics, and IQ are interlinked. Sure, there’s observable human variation, and IQ has some demonstrable link to your genes — but this connection doesn’t apply to large scale populations of people. That is to say, to races of human beings. The data is simply not there. Sorry, but it’s not. And more importantly, the entire experiment was flawed to begin with — because as we’ve seen, time and again, the very definitions of words being used are so ambiguous as to resist any kind of scientific classification. Unless your an entomologist, race is going to be fairly useless in the genetic sense of the word, especially for humans.

And frankly, I imagine Cavalli’s gotta be stroking his head, wondering, “What the heck are these racists doing?” Because, let me tell ya’ll, the more you try to shove his research that contradicts your ideology into your race-realist box, the more inconsistencies you’ll see in your own arguments. (I mean, besides the host of others we’ve discussed in similar posts.)

As for Obsidian’s complaints about, “WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO WITH THE NOT SO BRIGHT PEOPLE?”

I’d say the answer to that lies in the condescending presumption of the question.

Not so bright people aren’t some cross ’round our necks for us to find something to do with. They’re people, for lawd’s sake! That’s like when the colonial European powers used to say, “What are we going to do with all of these Africans in Africa?” Or when English society said, “What are we gonna do with all of these disabled people?” Or as Europe now is saying, “What are we gonna do with all of these Gypsies?”

Do ya get the point yet? Or do I have to spell it out? Presuming that certain people don’t get to have any agency over their lives is the exact kind of bigotry that gets us here in the first place!

And this kind of thinking goes back to Cavalli-Sforza’s arguments against people like Murray and Herrnstein, who, by virtue of their flawed research, think they can tell the underclass what to do. Which is why, at least for me, I find far more importance in refuting the arguments for race-realism and HBD because they are used as a foundation — just like the N***’s pseudoscience was used against the Jews — for discrimination, and the eventual devastation of entire groups of people.

These are the actual “tough questions” that apparently our resident Black Republican (a concept which always reminds me of the Gay Conservatives and Jewish Republicans I know…) and others refuse to acknowledge. Why? Probably a myriad of factors: lack of scientific expertise, internalized racism, pariah complex, special-snowflake syndrome, and maybe even secret agreement. But the fact is that talking about scientific racism is just as important as dealing with any other facet of racism.

And maybe that’s just me coming from my heritage’s point of view. My ancestors died for not taking stuff like this seriously. So excuse me while I take a lesson from history, and continue dropping knowledge bombs on this BS.

Just so the record is clear on this, I took it upon myself to lookup any instances in the past where Abagond directly, and without any reference whatsoever to Whites, Racism, etc et al, tackles the very real problems of Black America, ala Bill Cosby. So, I used the search engine on this very blog to search for the words “Bill Cosby”; this is what I got – a post on Michael Eric Dyson. Dyson, for those of you who don’t know, vehemently opposed Cosby’s views and remarks to the point of actually writing a book about it, which I have read and felt that Dyson did indeed make some good points.

But it doesn’t really address what Cosby talked about.

Here’s the money quote of Abagond’s on that very post: “Bill Cosby blames poor blacks for their own troubles. He sounds almost white. Dyson says Cosby only looks at what blacks are doing wrong, not at what whites are doing wrong, which is just as much a part of the picture.”

I could go on – like his comments about “Rented Negroes” where he has some choice words for Juan Williams, John McWhorter and even Booker T. Washington, who he refers to as a “bought man”. I think all of these sentiments explain very well exactly where Abagond is coming from, and, why we have yet to hear any of the kinds of honest discussion in the form of the topics I’ve broached and been broaching here for quite some time, just never see the light of day. Simply put, that isn’t Abagond’s focus, facts be danged – and hey, he has every right not to. I got nothing personal against him and actually like many of the topics he raises and his take on them.

But at some point, at least for me, you just gotta step outside of your ideological sandbox and deal in the realworld as it is. And I see this whole enormous reaction to The Bell Curve, as just that – playing in the ideological sandbox, instead of dealing with the meat of the realworld, which is what The Bell Curve is actually talking about (“What are we gonna do with the not so bright people”?).

Z: As for Obsidian’s complaints about, “WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO WITH THE NOT SO BRIGHT PEOPLE?”

I’d say the answer to that lies in the condescending presumption of the question.

O: No, it doesn’t. Do you deny that all people won’t be born bright? Yes, or no?

Z: Not so bright people aren’t some cross ’round our necks for us to find something to do with.

O: Yes they are, and even Satoshi Kanazawa speaks about this in an article he wrote for Psychology Today about how criminals do indeed have lower IQ than non-criminals.

Z: They’re people, for lawd’s sake! That’s like when the colonial European powers used to say, “What are we going to do with all of these Africans in Africa?” Or when English society said, “What are we gonna do with all of these disabled people?” Or as Europe now is saying, “What are we gonna do with all of these Gypsies?”

O: In the case of the disabled, we came up with laws that focused on their specific needs and interests, and rightly so in my view. I am arguing that we put a much needed focus on the Left Behind in our time, many of whom will be disportionately Black.

Z: Do ya get the point yet? Or do I have to spell it out? Presuming that certain people don’t get to have any agency over their lives is the exact kind of bigotry that gets us here in the first place!

O: Uh, and where have I made any such claim? Please quote back my exact words to me? I’ll wait.

Z: And this kind of thinking goes back to Cavalli-Sforza’s arguments against people like Murray and Herrnstein, who, by virtue of their flawed research, think they can tell the underclass what to do. Which is why, at least for me, I find far more importance in refuting the arguments for race-realism and HBD because they are used as a foundation — just like the N***’s pseudoscience was used against the Jews — for discrimination, and the eventual devastation of entire groups of people.

O: Godwin’s Law, anyone? Is there ANY evidence – any at all, Zekie – that supports your assertion here? That Murray’s work somehow leads us on a slippery slope back to the ovens – this time, with Black folk? I wanna see this one…

Z: These are the actual “tough questions” that apparently our resident Black Republican (a concept which always reminds me of the Gay Conservatives and Jewish Republicans I know…)

O: LOL! Ad Hominem is alive and well, I see, you little Zekie, you. Alas, I am sorry to disappoint, but I am not a Republican, “Black” or otherwise (though MLK’s dad definitely was, and quite possibly MLK himself. *shrugs*)…

Z: and others refuse to acknowledge. Why? Probably a myriad of factors: lack of scientific expertise, internalized racism, pariah complex, special-snowflake syndrome, and maybe even secret agreement. But the fact is that talking about scientific racism is just as important as dealing with any other facet of racism.

O: I am not against talking about scientific racism. I am against not calling a spade a spade, especially when it is looking at you dead in the eye. Black folks have real problems that we need to be talking about. Honestly. It’s really as simple as that, heck, even Barack Obama said it.

Z: And maybe that’s just me coming from my heritage’s point of view. My ancestors died for not taking stuff like this seriously. So excuse me while I take a lesson from history, and continue dropping knowledge bombs on this BS.

O: The only thing you’ve been dropping ARE bombs of BS. Like I told you in this august forum before, my people liberated yours from the prison camps and ovens and certain death, while they were still made to ride the back of the bus while still in uniform, so no, I’ll take no education from you, moral or otherwise, you have nothing to say to me on that score.

But you are free to tell me if what Bill Cosby said was indeed true or false. Think real hard now… 😉

For someone who champions and pushes “The Bell Curve”, your remarks on this thread come off as a not-so-innocent-seeming derailment. Squid ink is what Doug1 would call it. Of all my posts on “The Bell Curve”, this is the most damning and what do you do? Change the subject.

Obsidian, while most of your fisking was… entertaining, there is ONE point that particularly caught my eye:

“my people liberated yours from the prison camps and ovens and certain death, while they were still made to ride the back of the bus while still in uniform, so no, I’ll take no education from you, moral or otherwise, you have nothing to say to me on that score.”

Frankly Obsidian, my people suffered lynchings and hangings, signs on our doors, on our lawns, rocks thrown at us, dogs loosed on us, and were refused service in restaurants, pools, hotels, on and on. And all for being Jewish in America.

But yet we still made time to help found the NAACP. Still made time time to teach at HBCU’s after fleeing the Holocaust. Still gave money and blood and sacrificed for the cause.

If you want to play the Oppression Olympics game Obs, I’ll be more than happy to indulge you somewhere else. But right here you’re so far off-topic you’ve fallen off like a dead leaf.

Go back to kissing racist MRA heels at The Spearhead. And let the big people talk.

A: For someone who champions and pushes “The Bell Curve”, your remarks on this thread come off as a not-so-innocent-seeming derailment. Squid ink is what Doug1 would call it. Of all my posts on “The Bell Curve”, this is the most damning and what do you do? Change the subject.

O: Of course, you have every right to interpret my comments in any way you wish, and, to take any appropriate action as you deem fit. However, if you are asking me what I am doing, I would respond, that I am attempting to foster a realworld conversation, where we both live, Abagond. That’s what I “champion”. That’s what I am “pushing” for. I am not upset by a book like The Bell Curve; indeed on this score, I think Thomas Sowell’s approach is the correct one – one that dispassionately considers what is being said and takes it from there. Did Sowell spend all kinds of “squid ink” trying to find every scholar under the sun in an attempt to discredit the book? Perhaps you know, but as far as I know, he did not. He simply considered the arguments on their own merits and took it from there. And, as your post on Sowell and TBC clearly shows, he comes away from the whole thing saying, “hmm, interesting book”. No more, no less.

Please let it be noted that I do indeed have my criticism of TBC, and have made them quite well known. But that’s another discussion perhaps for another day. I am merely attempting to get a conversation that, as I have shown above, you in particular, do not seem amenable in having.

Z: Obsidian, while most of your fisking was… entertaining, there is ONE point that particularly caught my eye:

O: I try…

“my people liberated yours from the prison camps and ovens and certain death, while they were still made to ride the back of the bus while still in uniform, so no, I’ll take no education from you, moral or otherwise, you have nothing to say to me on that score.”

Z: Frankly Obsidian, my people suffered lynchings and hangings, signs on our doors, on our lawns, rocks thrown at us, dogs loosed on us, and were refused service in restaurants, pools, hotels, on and on. And all for being Jewish in America.

O: Then take it up with the powers that be; Black folk had nothing to do with any of that. And in any event,. do you deny what I said above? Is it true, or false? See, I gotta do these kinds of things with you, given your penchant for running all over the place, don’t ya know…

Z: But yet we still made time to help found the NAACP. Still made time time to teach at HBCU’s after fleeing the Holocaust. Still gave money and blood and sacrificed for the cause.

O: I am sure those who are members of the NAACP thanks you – and besides, Jews had been running the organization for decades, at the top even. You and yours were compensated. So what’s the problem?

Z: If you want to play the Oppression Olympics game Obs, I’ll be more than happy to indulge you somewhere else. But right here you’re so far off-topic you’ve fallen off like a dead leaf.

O: Says the guy who, every chance he gets, whips out his Hebrew Card. Cry me a river, son. Like I said, the facts about WW2 are unassailable. I defy you to disprove it.

Z: Go back to kissing racist MRA heels at The Spearhead.

O: LOL. That statement alone says, yet again, that you have no idea what the heck you are talking about – and another weaksauce ad hominem attack to boot. SMH…

Z: And let the big people talk.

O: When a big person actually steps up front to say something, I will be more than happy to sitdown.

@Obsidian
“because we now live in an age where everyone sees our dirty laundry whether we like it or not”

OUR dirty laundry?

Speak for yourself. And once again I have no problem talking about black pathologies. I am really beginning to think you don’t live around any Blacks bc NONE of the ones I am around talk about white people. Whenever we speak about the troubles in the black community, we talk about Blacks. The only time we speak of the white racism that has indirectly affected Black culture(prison industrial complex, hiring/promotion discrimination) is when we are faced with dumb white racist who fail to understand history and the inner workings of American society.

I mean did you not read my 1st comment? You can claim that none of us are willing to talk about this, but I took this right on str8 away.

Once again do you live around Black people? Bill Cosby IS NOT the first Black person to say what he said. Things like this are said ALL of the time amongst other Blacks. ALL of the time. The only difference is White ppl heard him. Stop acting as if he is a lone wolf.

And yes, saying something 5 different times in the same way does come off as whining.

Obsidian The fact(?) that Murray et al may be racists, or for that matter the fact(?) that their book may be methoologically flawed has nothing to do with the premise they’ve laidout in said book

Sweet mother of Jesus.

Uncle mu you are very wrong here. Considering how Murray & Desouza et… feel about blk people it’s only to be expected that maybe their prejudices were a motivating factor in writing The Bell Curve as well as causing the authors to stretch the truth or “reach” where they saw fit.

Obsidian The fact(?) that Murray et al may be racists, or for that matter the fact(?) that their book may be methoologically flawed has nothing to do with the premise they’ve laidout in said book, nor my “take” on it as experssed in the comments above and previously on this blog and elsewhere.

The whole discussion seems to be centered around arguing over how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, instead of simply rolling up our sleeves, casting down our buckets where we are, and getting on with it.

Uncle Mu, you used 3-4 clichés in this paragraph. No wonder Femi didn’t understand you. Remember that not everyone here is an American so not everyone will understand our clichés.

Haha it seems Obsidian has derailed the entire comment section from the original job. I attempted to steer us back on track by asking him questions directly concerned with what was written, but Obs waan hannit! Good job O.

Now can we go back to the subject at hand? Or are we going to turn this into Obs guest post?

I tell you what the beef in NYC is… it’s with some of the smaller Jewish groups like the Hasids. A few years ago there was a brush up between the police and the Hasids(?). One man slapped a police officer so hard he permantly lost hearing in one ear. The guy got off. The feeling here among those who hate Jewish people,& this crosses racial lines because I’ve heard it from non blk people too.

Is that “they” can get away with anything and that they control to much wealth and that is what I thinks feeds some of the weirder conspiracy theories. I personally think blk folk should mimic more of the actions of Jewish people in this country. Our neighborhoods would greatly benefit.

***I find far more importance in refuting the arguments for race-realism and HBD because they are used as a foundation — just like the N***’s pseudoscience was used against the Jews — for discrimination, and the eventual devastation of entire groups of people.***

1. The Nazis would never have allowed “The Bell Curve’ because they banned psychometric testing. The jews did too well on the tests. Stalin banned them too.

2. The idea that everyone should be equal is also behind a fair amount of persecution isn’t it? Consider market dominant minority groups that incur the wrath of other groups who think they’re unfairly overrepresented in wealthy occupations.

2. The devastation of groups? What HBD sites have you been looking at? In any case, the main ‘race realist’ scientists tend to place East Asians at the top in terms of iq type abilities.

a 2005 study by the ADL. Hopefully the numbers went down, but that they were that high in the first place is unsettling.

The problem with Jewish stereotypes is that, well… they’re stereotypes! Most Jews are not rich, famous, super-smart, in Hollywood, or wear crazy black hats. But you never hear about the poor Jews, especially the poor Jews of Color who can’t even get Israeli citizenship most of the time.

There are so many conspiracy theories surrounding Jews these days, it almost feels like I’ve traveled back in time to the Middle Ages where everyone calls me Shylock.

But yes, I am Jewish.

And now getting back to the topic at hand… Cavalli-Sforza.

Another important point I’d offer in this post (which will help us get back on track) is that Abagond pointed out that Cavalli actually called TBC authors out as racists. VERY few scientists do that. Even Stephen Jay Gould was hesitant to come right out and say it. Though that didn’t stop him from saying a bunch of other stuff.

The biggest concern I have is that other scientists won’t follow this example. Too often, people can be too nice about things like this, especially White people in high positions. Whether they’re afraid of getting in trouble, or just plain lazy about it, calling a spade a spade is essential in this debate, I think.

I have but it’s like they disappeared or at least in the mainstream media.

We have blue-collar Jewish men here in NYC. There use to be a lot of Jewish cab drivers before cab driving became a job for new immigrants.

I think another issue is being Jewish isn’t for the most part as noticeable as being blk. A lot of racism is based on surface level stuff ie what people see when they look at you and the thoughts that are triggered in their minds as a result of your appearance. So mainstream jews get grouped into the larger white group.

especially the poor Jews of Color who can’t even get Israeli citizenship most of the time

Yes like the Falasha or Ethiopian Jews. I’ve heard racists use the denigration of Falashas by the “whiter” Jews as a way to justify their racism against Jews.

Being a White Jew is kind of like “passing” as a Black person. You don’t get directed anti-Semitism/Racism, but you do get to see people’s true feelings because they think you’re part of the club. Most of the time, it isn’t pretty.

I know about the Ethiopian Jews, but I’m glad that Israel at least airlifted them outta there. The only problem is that after that they kinda forgot about ’em.

The Falasha Mura situation are definitely an instance of White, European Jews attempting to control who is defined as a Jew. But I can see the problem in accepting them, since converting to a different religion — even on pain of death — is considered permanent apostasy in Judaism. So, in essence, there’s not much hope there. But we’ll see if they’ll raise their immigration quotas and restrict their conversion back to Judaism so they don’t HAVE to become Orthodox.

Not sure about the exact percentage, but according to ADL American blacks are 3-4 times more antisemitic than non-blacks. They are the third most antisemitic ethnoracial group in America, after Muslims (of course) and foreign-born Hispanics (talk about the jobs Americans won’t do).

In the light of all the help and goodwill blacks received from Jews throughout their history, the above would seem inexplicable. And yet, I think there is an explanation.

Antisemitism, in the modern world, is an integral part of almost any loser (or pro-loser) culture . Essentially, antisemitism today is aggressive loserdom’s assault on conspicuous success. In America, black Jew-hatred is a particular case of whitey-hatred. After all, Jews prominently display most of the traits for which whites are hated: industriousness and thrift (perceived as greed), respect for learning and expertise (perceived as elitism), aversion to violence (perceived as cowardice) etc. In addition, focusing one’s resentment on Jews is a safer proposition than taking on all of the whites, since a lot of Gentile whites aren’t particularly enamored of the Jews, either, and are unlikely to pick up a fruitless fight on their behalf.

I gotta say that those numbers surprised me also. I’ll say right now that I have heard ignorant things about Indians, Asians, Arabs, Whites, and Mexicans from Black people. I hesitate to say racist bc none of these statements had any hate or declarations of supremacy(minus a few about whites). I have a friend, she’s the sweetest little Southern thing, and every time she sees someone who looks Arab she calls them a Muslim -_-. I swear she is not a racist, but she really just doesn’t know any better.

Either way I can honestly say that in my actual life I have never ever heard any ignorant, racist, or conspiratorial things about Jewish people. South Park taught me what the ‘K’ word was.

Idk… I live in a place where there aren’t many Jewish people, so it wouldn’t make sense to talk about them. In fact, it wasn’t until my first year of college that I actually met a person that declared to be Jewish, my former PoliSci professor.

Did the survey ask questions like, “Would you mind if a family member dated a Jew?” or “Do you hate Jewish people?” If they asked PURELY about stereotypes than I’m not sure that I can accept these results as being anti-semitic. I see a lot of Jewish surnames in credits. I’ve read Joel Stein’s LAtimes article. My PoliSci professor told me himself that the higher up in academia, the more Jewish it gets. Why wouldn’t I believe Jewish folks are over-represented in these fields? That does mean I hate them or thing they are using their power to carry out nefarious deeds.

**Another important point I’d offer in this post (which will help us get back on track) is that Abagond pointed out that Cavalli actually called TBC authors out as racists. VERY few scientists do that. Even Stephen Jay Gould was hesitant to come right out and say it. Though that didn’t stop him from saying a bunch of other stuff.

The biggest concern I have is that other scientists won’t follow this example. Too often, people can be too nice about things like this, especially White people in high positions. Whether they’re afraid of getting in trouble, or just plain lazy about it, calling a spade a spade is essential in this debate, I think.**

To be honest, I never heard of the Bell Curve until Abagond did a post on it. I don’t think many Americans have heard of the book–although I may be wrong.

***Another important point I’d offer in this post (which will help us get back on track) is that Abagond pointed out that Cavalli actually called TBC authors out as racists.***

Ironically, people suggested Cavalli-Sforza’s Human Genome Diversity Project was a racist enterprise. And it worked, the funding dried up and the project was uncompleted. So Cavalli-Sforza was hoist by his own petard.

***I find far more importance in refuting the arguments for race-realism and HBD because they are used as a foundation — just like the N***’s pseudoscience was used against the Jews — for discrimination, and the eventual devastation of entire groups of people.***

1. The N@zis would never have allowed “The Bell Curve’ because they banned psychometric testing. The jews did too well on the tests. Stalin banned them too.

2. The idea that everyone should be equal is also behind a fair amount of persecution isn’t it? Consider market dominant minority groups that incur the wrath of other groups who think they’re unfairly overrepresented in wealthy occupations.

2. The devastation of groups? What HBD sites have you been looking at? In any case, the main ‘race realist’ scientists tend to place East Asians at the top in terms of iq type abilities.

that’s mot a joke btw, I’m very serious. John Ogbu covered one of the chief reasons for this. Too many blk American parents are handsoff in their approach to their kids education.

O: Yes, and there was a whole spiel over at, I think it was The Grio website, by a Sista who wrote a book extolling the virtue of what she called “Lioness Moms”, bascially the Black version of Amy Chua. From what I can see, good luck with that.

CN: I can’t believe the number is that high.

I tell you what the beef in NYC is… it’s with some of the smaller Jewish groups like the Hasids. A few years ago there was a brush up between the police and the Hasids(?). One man slapped a police officer so hard he permantly lost hearing in one ear. The guy got off. The feeling here among those who hate Jewish people,& this crosses racial lines because I’ve heard it from non blk people too.

Is that “they” can get away with anything and that they control to much wealth and that is what I thinks feeds some of the weirder conspiracy theories. I personally think blk folk should mimic more of the actions of Jewish people in this country. Our neighborhoods would greatly benefit.

O: Actually, it goes back a bit further than that, specifically up there in NYC back to the late 60s-early 70s, with the schools where Jewish folk were the majority in terms of the teaching staff. Look it up, you’ll find it interesting.

CN: Zek are you Jewish??

O: What, are you kiddin’ me? Didn’t you get the special delivery, certified mail memo? The guy just annouces it in dang near every forum he goes to, for crying out loud. Talk about wrapping oneself up in their ethnic/religious/racial identity…whew!

CN: Uncle Mu, you used 3-4 clichés in this paragraph. No wonder Femi didn’t understand you. Remember that not everyone here is an American so not everyone will understand our clichés.

O: Trust me, the least of Femi’s problems is her lack of understanding the American lexicon.

CN: Sweet mother of Jesus.

Uncle mu you are very wrong here. Considering how Murray & Desouza et… feel about blk people it’s only to be expected that maybe their prejudices were a motivating factor in writing The Bell Curve as well as causing the authors to stretch the truth or “reach” where they saw fit.

O: Sure; but so what? If the facts stand, they stand, if not, they don’t. I just don’t get what all the handwringing and angst is all about; it’s like no one here has never encountered people who may not like Black folk or something before. Big deal! (this is assuming of course, that Murray and D’Souza in fact, don’t like Black folks; do you have any proof of this assertion?)

O: Nope, I am speaking for black folk on the whole, and do you know why? Because that is how we are seen and assessed, thats why.

C: And once again I have no problem talking about black pathologies.

O: Yes, you do.

C: I am really beginning to think you don’t live around any Blacks bc NONE of the ones I am around talk about white people.

O: You gotta be kiddin’ me with that kind of argument, right?

C: Whenever we speak about the troubles in the black community, we talk about Blacks. The only time we speak of the white racism that has indirectly affected Black culture(prison industrial complex, hiring/promotion discrimination) is when we are faced with dumb white racist who fail to understand history and the inner workings of American society.

O: You need to be speaking about it on the interwebs in forums and blogs like these where it can be openly heard. That’s what matters.

C: I mean did you not read my 1st comment? You can claim that none of us are willing to talk about this, but I took this right on str8 away.

O: Yea, I read your first comment, and it too was some tortured logic type stuff, LOL. You didn’t really want to look at the potential pink elephant in the middle of the room, so you went around the mulberry bush with the whole cultural argument, then the victimology argument, then the singlemom household argument, etc et al. I am suggesting that its possible that maybe, in aggregate and on average, Black folk may not be atom-spltters.

Now, having said that – SO WHAT?

Your response?

C: Once again do you live around Black people?

O: Have all my life and up to this very moment…

C: Bill Cosby IS NOT the first Black person to say what he said.

O: In the major media? Uh, YES, he is.

C: Things like this are said ALL of the time amongst other Blacks. ALL of the time. The only difference is White ppl heard him. Stop acting as if he is a lone wolf.

O: But you see, that’s the point – we need to be openly putting it on blast, for a number of reasons. If you like I’ll be more than willing to discuss those reasons with you or anyone else.

C: And yes, saying something 5 different times in the same way does come off as whining.

O: So does Abagond’s roughly half a dozen posts on The Bell Curve, qualify as “whining” and if not, why?

I’m not familiar with the mechanics of the survey, but judging from my experience with surveys like it they probably asked questions relating to their direct experience with Jews, what stereotypes they believe, if they associate Jews with money or super-smarts, etc.

The NOI and Farrakhan are probably among the worst of in the Black community though. They engage in lot of Holocaust denial, as well as portraying Jews as controlling the economy, being masterminds behind the Atlantic Slave Trade, and strangely calling us “bloodsuckers”.

Schwartz,

Steve Sailer himself advocates for controlling Black people as if they were children. And that’s tame compared to what the Stormfront HBDers think. Seriously, the movement you ascribe to is basically a Hate Group. Maybe you should reassess your faith in scientific racism…

Cavalli-Sforza’s project lost funding and support because he wanted to use the genes without permission or compensation to the people, many of whom have been exploited already for centuries. Just tag, bag, and move it along, which isn’t ethical science. Honestly, I like the idea, but not the execution. Yet, he still managed to go through with it. Check Stanford’s magazine article, May/June 1999.

As for the idea of everyone being equal suffering recent persecution, that’s nothing new. Equality has been under attack since mankind began. As the saying goes, “haters gonna hate.”

The N@zi’s would certainly have commissioned TBC, only they’d have changed the results a bit to make Asians and Jews below them. Yet even they acknowledge the intelligence of the German-Jewish population. They just portrayed it negatively.

Seems we’re all burning the midnight oil on this subject — except for me. I’m on west coast time. Still early =)

“WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO WITH THE NOT SO BRIGHT PEOPLE? A goodly portion of whom may very well be Black?”

You help them. You know, help? Like, take care of them. You do not leave them behind. Yeah, it is that simple. Where there is a will, there is a way, man! Trust me, it works.

We have lots of people in Finland who are “NOT SO BRIGHT” in our schools, actually we have loads and loads of them, all over the place, in southern capital region, west coast, eastern border area, Lapland, you name it. Our school system is geared up to help them. Does it work? I have no idea. Check the PISA results. 😀

But what is your main beef here? You are a black guy, right? And you seem to go on and on and on and on how stupid blacks are according some friggin IQ tests or something like that.

So you are black and you are saying that blacks are more stupid than whites and that is genetical fact? No? So what you are saying? Majority of blacks are stupid because of genes? Or are you basically saying that race is a biological fact? You see, I am not a politically correct person so I can say these things too.

And what is it with this Jew thing? Jews have been enduring persecution and massmurders and genocides since the roman times. Actually even before that, in the hands of egyptians and babylonians. So they know a thing or two about these things too.

And anyone, being jewish or not, can comment your comments here, just like you can. So no need to be so irritated if somebpdy does not agree with you.

And when you answer, please, try to be short and on point. My english has its limitations since I am a foreigner.

By the way, this is extremely hilarious:

“Americans have the right to be biased. *shrugs* Get over it.”

Sometimes you sound awful lot like an cross burning red neck from the hill country in the South 😀

Man, I honestly don’t know where to start. First off, let me restate that I know very little about the science of genetics. However, being considered a minority in a white dominated society gave me some experience with racism. Judging by your comments alone, it seems like you’re giving TBC, their authors, and those who use it as a reliable source for studying race and justisy their racism, a pass as implied here:

“…what Murray said is still significant in many ways, and our refusal to honestly grapple with that – I mean Black folks now – some 15 years on since the first publication of TBC – is striking…

…Roughly half – HALF – of ALL Black boys, dropout of highschool, Abagond. Now, we can attribute this to any number of things; but the bottomline is this: we either address that, or it addresses us. We know what this means insofar as its impacts on the Black dating/mating market alone, to say nothing about the health of the Black family, Black economic health, and so forth.”

So, what does this have to do with TBC and its so-called findings? Are you saying that TBC is virtually correct in their studies, or are you simply avoiding the topic for a topic you believe is important? Moving on…

“Black kids consistently score lower on tests, even when taking class and family income into account. Just about every measure confirms this, military testing, John Ogbu’s studies, you name it. Again, we can go round and round arguing what the causes of this or the motivations of those who point these ugly truths out are, but the fact of the matter is that White and Asian kids who come from poorer backgrounds usually ace more well-heeled Black kids, and Black Males score lower on military tests than do Whites. How do we address that? I mean, really?”

Again, what YOU saying? Are you saying that Murray and Herrnstein were correct about blacks, whites and Asians? Are you saying that there must be some genetic flaw in blacks as a way of explaining drop out rates, crime, out-of-wedlock births, and anything else you see is wrong with blacks? Are you saying the educational system in this nation is fair and caters to the development of blacks?

In your comments you’ve brought up points that hinted that you believe that something must be wrong with blacks, and that racism and prejudice is the least of our worries. I’m sorry, but I strongly disagree. Why? Because it’s easy, very easy, to conclude that the problems black people face were brought upon themselves. It’s an old tactic disguised as science and public policies, and most people, black and white, will agree because most people don’t want to share even a sliver of responsibility for the injustices brought onto blacks in the past or today, nor do they feel they are worthy of ANY kind of help. It’s almost of the racist spirit lingering within America. Period.

Another thing I noticed is your agreeing with the rants of Bill Cosby. He may have meant well; I don’t know, but it’s still wrong to believe that blacks are the cause of their own problems WITHOUT acknowledging the history of oppression and racism. It, again, doesn’t reveal the possible origins behind the ailments going on within some black communities across this nation and the world. We don’t want to know what caused this. Instead, we will call it examples of their “culture”, their behavior, or even contribute it to genetics, anything that makes it seem like it’s their fault and make us less caring about fixing the problems.

Honestly, Obsidian, the condescending attitude towards blacks is an example why some blacks are in the state they’re in. Have you ever helped blacks who were less fortunate than you are, or did you reject them?

As a black man there are times I wonder why these conditions, as you’ve listed them exist, but I also have to know that they weren’t caused because of some “flaw” in their genes. It’s just another example of “blaming the victim” and blacks today are STILL victims in a land that STILL sees them as less than human…

…or not human.

Your other comment that strucked me was the following:

“But at some point, at least for me, you just gotta step outside of your ideological sandbox and deal in the realworld as it is. And I see this whole enormous reaction to The Bell Curve, as just that – playing in the ideological sandbox, instead of dealing with the meat of the realworld, which is what The Bell Curve is actually talking about (“What are we gonna do with the not so bright people”?).”

What is the real world to you? For me the reality is that this nation is a white supremacist, racist nation, and the dark history of racism and the covert systems of racism found in almost every component of life in this nation contributed to many problems facing the black communities including middle to upper-class neighborhoods. It contributes directly and indirectly to the problems you’ve mentioned. At least that’s what I think. If you think otherwise, it’s all good, but don’t try to derail the subject or lash out at folks who disagree with you. The latter will get you what you dish out.

Anyway, I just wanted to say my piece. Thanks for the entry Abagond. I hope I didn’t overstep my boundaries. If I did I apologize.

You kind of did overstep since you are getting sucked into Obsidian’s derailment. I will let it stand since it is a pretty general, philosophical comment about Obsidian’s position, but I might wind up deleting it later.

The Nazis would never have allowed “The Bell Curve’ because they banned psychometric testing.

The n@zis were staunchly anti-intellectual since in the early phases of their rise to power it was mainly intellectuals who saw behind the crap. Individual intelligence is fairly irrelevant for fascists as long as they hold the power through brainwashing and repression. It’s a bit like a schoolyard bully. Fascists thrive in an environment of collective ignorance, hence their efforts to cultivate cluelessness dressed in seemingly plausible pseudoscientific dogma.

Sforza isn’t an American, nor is his area of expertise in urban affairs or public policy, and I think this is something that we would do well to keep in mind.

Now you’re talking. Cavalli-Sforza scientifically debunked the claims of people dabbling in his area of expertise. He never made any connection from genetics to social problems in urban areas in the USA. Others did.

So now you’re making a u-turn towards sociopolitical implications. Even more precisely just in the USA (5% of the world population).

(btw I’m male. Just mentioning because I saw “her” together with my name. I’ll start posting with my full name again ;))

Obsidian Trust me, the least of Femi’s problems is her lack of understanding the American lexicon.

No uncle mu, you should rewrite your response so Femi can understand you and respond in kind. Furthermore Femi is more of the most insightful and analytical thinkers I’ve come across on this sphere on the internet.

Obsidian Sure; but so what? If the facts stand, they stand, if not, they don’t. I just don’t get what all the handwringing and angst is all about; it’s like no one here has never encountered people who may not like Black folk or something before. Big deal! (this is assuming of course, that Murray and D’Souza in fact, don’t like Black folks; do you have any proof of this assertion

But this is the point that you’re missing. How can we say for sure if they are facts when maybe just maybe the authors allowed their biases to get the best of them.

Obsidian Americans have the right to be biased. *shrugs*
Get over it.

Not when they are writing books with academic authority that they are hoping will used to shape public policy they don’t.

Zek Being a White Jew is kind of like “passing” as a Black person. You don’t get directed anti-Semitism/Racism, but you do get to see people’s true feelings because they think you’re part of the club. Most of the time, it isn’t pretty.

Excellent observation. You hit the nail on the head my dear. I’ve got to buy you a beer for this one, I hope Jasmin won’t mind cause it’s all platonic

someone who is not zek wrote Not sure about the exact percentage, but according to ADL American blacks are 3-4 times more antisemitic than non-blacks

To be honest, in my experience it very rare to hear a blk person randomly talk about hatred of the Jews. And it rare occurrences that it does happen, It’s sometimes related to a bad experience or the “illumnanatii” type stuff. Such as how can such a small group of people own so much and the evils of Zionism. And I’ve never come across a blk Holocaust denier .

Obsidian What, are you kiddin’ me? Didn’t you get the special delivery, certified mail memo? The guy just annouces it in dang near every forum he goes to, for crying out loud. Talk about wrapping oneself up in their ethnic/religious/racial identity…whew!

Uncle Mu the same could be said for you and I. As you go to the white game sites asking these guys how their lessons are going to work for you. and I with my double entendre of a name “chic noir”.

Haha, I’m sure Jasmin will let you buy me ONE — as long as she gets her obligatory side-eye. (Kidding!)

I’ll admit, I’ve heard VERY few Black people use anti-Semitic rhetoric in any kind of offensive way. Most of the time they’re just repeating things they’ve heard. But it only takes one to ruin your day…

As for Obsidian, it doesn’t matter how much he emphasizes his Blackness on The Spearhead (and other forums), because if I just mention being Jewish for a relevant argument then I MUST be “wrapping” myself in it! Why, I’m surprised ya’ll ain’t joking on all this Jew! I mean, we can’t have that now, can we? Haha.

Besides, it’s not like he just told me I’m playing the Race Card. (Or did he?) But I can’t even use the Jew Card? Ouch. Talk about cramping my self-identity.

Anyhoo, about Cavalli-Sforza…

As I understand it, the study he wanted to do, the Genome Diversity Project was aimed at documenting a wider variation of human diversity in order to more properly measure the differences between populations. I think, despite the research’s flawed method, that such data would be useful in further shoring up the fact that race in humans is biologically and genetically unsound.

Also, I wonder how a taxonomist would approach this issue. Because taxonomies are about as much a theoretical construct as anything you can find in science. They’re basically made-up, though based on observable differences, and measureable traits.

Taxonomically, separating humans into races doesn’t work the same way it does for bees or beetles. You can’t find genetic isolation or selective breeding. (Not anymore at least.) The geographic isolation simply didn’t exist, particularly during the longest periods of human evolution. It was only recently that, due to various cultural factors, that populations refused to interbreed.

Take a look at the development of humans in the Rift Valley. There wasn’t any evidence of anatomically modern humans diverging into races. And there wasn’t all the way through till we get to modern times. Only now can forensic anthropologists even determine race with any accuracy due to the relatively good preservation of bones.

But as a professor in Fossil Practicum once told me (paraphrase), “You won’t know the race unless you know where and when the bones were found. And even then you have to hope they didn’t eff up the skull digging it out.”

zek As for Obsidian, it doesn’t matter how much he emphasizes his Blackness on The Spearhead (and other forums), because if I just mention being Jewish for a relevant argument then I MUST be “wrapping” myself in it! Why, I’m surprised ya’ll ain’t joking on all this Jew! I mean, we can’t have that now, can we? Haha

Yea he really threw me with that one. I can’t believe he went there with it. It’s probably something in the real world that’s bothering him.

Sometimes you just have to do like Obama& Jay Z do and just wipe it off your shoulders.

***As I understand it, the study he wanted to do, the Genome Diversity Project was aimed at documenting a wider variation of human diversity in order to more properly measure the differences between populations. ..

THe Diversity Project was meant to look at about 500 “isolated populations”. It’s because of relative genetic or reproductive isolation that there are relatively diverse populations.

***As for the idea of everyone being equal suffering recent persecution, that’s nothing new. Equality has been under attack since mankind began. As the saying goes, “haters gonna hate.”***

What I mean here is that blank slate (as Steven Pinker discusses) and egalitarian type views have also been the foundation for persecution. If you rule out HBD then the overrepresentation of some groups (particularly market dominant minority groups) has often been blamed on some deliberate unfairness or cheating.

That description is misleading, because isolation in genetics means, complete, total, and unequivocal isolation. But we know that doesn’t happen on a global scale. There are many small populations that are isolated culturally, or even geographically isolated, but not completely, and not in any large-scale, evolutionary time-scale way. It takes A LONG TIME — even in punctuated equilibrium — to develop enough variation for IQ differences to occur. And that’s assuming you can even accurately measure IQ in the first place!

No population on Earth has ever been genetically isolated long enough to evolve to the specifications of HBD pseudo-science.

Reproductive isolation also only works short-term, so it wouldn’t account for the kind of fundamental IQ difference either. You can’t breed large groups of stupid people (despite what it might seem when watching reality TV) that are genetically predisposed to being stupider in a few thousand years. It takes much longer, it really does.

the overrepresentation of some groups (particularly market dominant minority groups) has often been blamed on some deliberate unfairness or cheating.

If you’re referring to the dominance of East Asians in the Canadian college market, or similar things (a la Tiger Moms) then I can tell you that’s racism. It’s what causes poor Whites to blame the less than 10% Black population at my college for using Affirmative Action that keeps them out. And conveniently they ignore all the legacies, athletic freebies, alum kids, and donor kids.

Because, you see, it has to be that 1 Black/Asian/Hispanic person cheating and using an unfair system designed to cheat them, specifically, from getting into colleges that are generally more than 50% White.

Equality is only used for persecution when people are doing it wrong. I think specifically of free-market capitalists.

There was a bit of a debate on the Gene Expression site about this a couple of years ago (‘Complex traits and evolution’). There was a follow up post which also had an interesting discussion. I’ll try and find the link.

***If you’re referring to the dominance of East Asians in the Canadian college market, or similar things (a la Tiger Moms)***

That is one example where HBD can help us understand why they are overrepresented. I was thinking more of examples that Amy Chua mentions in World on Fire, like Chinese in Indonesia & Malaysia, Jews in Russia, or Indians in Africa & Fiji. Also, just in terms of environmentalist/egalitarian ideologies groups that have suffered include ‘the kulaks’ and educated cambodians.

Thanks for an excellent post that confirms common sense. There’s still plenty of racism to go around and it’s not limited to poor white uneducated trash. If only it were. Uneducated bigots burn crosses. Educated bigots write books. The uneducated ones are more dangerous if they’re close to you. The educated ones are more dangerous to the nation as a whole.

As an immigrant from Italy dumb enough to make a career of naval aviation (really how smart could I be to fly on and off a ship for my adult life) and fortunate enough to be married to a beautiful and intelligent black woman, I can tell you this: my black kids are both a heck of a lot smarter than me and I’m proud of them for it. Thank the Lord!

Gimp,
Your citing the burning of crosses and the writing of books conflates two very important things that we in America hold very dear, which is the right to private ownership of property, and the right to freedom of speech and expression. The latter, if done on someone’s private property, is indeed a property crime; the latter, is merely the freedom of expression of ideas. One does not have to like the people who do either, but so long as no laws are broken, they are free to do both. (in other words, if a person wants to burn a cross on their own property, so be it).

zek: As for Obsidian, it doesn’t matter how much he emphasizes his Blackness on The Spearhead (and other forums), because if I just mention being Jewish for a relevant argument then I MUST be “wrapping” myself in it! Why, I’m surprised ya’ll ain’t joking on all this Jew! I mean, we can’t have that now, can we? Haha

CN: Yea he really threw me with that one. I can’t believe he went there with it. It’s probably something in the real world that’s bothering him.

O: OK, let’s objectively analyze these statements.

Whenever Zek wishes to drive home a point in the arguments he is making, he will often cite the fact that he is a Jew, ie, his ethnicity gives him a kind of perspective on a matter – a moral one, I might add – that his interlocutors simply do not have, or wish to cultivate.

Not only is this a logical fallacy in itself (Appeal to Authority), but I defy both of you to find many instances where I have done the same? You are free to use as source material my backlog of articles (there are more than two dozen of them over a two year period – and counting) at The Spearhead.

Jason Burns,
I would consider myself an American of primarily African ancestry, which means that I see the Constitution as my guide to life in this country. If a person doesn’t like a particular group of people, that is his or her right NOT to like them. If they wish to burn crosses on THEIR property, that again is his or her right. If they wish to write books detailing why they don’t like thus or so groups, once again, that is his or her right. The minute they take their ideas into the realworld in terms of attempting to effect others, is when they come into direct violation of the Constitution, where remedies exist for dealing with such infractions.

“Obsidian What, are you kiddin’ me? Didn’t you get the special delivery, certified mail memo? The guy just annouces it in dang near every forum he goes to, for crying out loud. Talk about wrapping oneself up in their ethnic/religious/racial identity…whew!”

CN: Uncle Mu the same could be said for you and I. As you go to the white game sites asking these guys how their lessons are going to work for you. and I with my double entendre of a name “chic noir”.

O: Yes, one *could* do that, but it would be indicative of a lack of precision in thinking and argumentation. Please see my previous comment for more on this point. Asking White guys in a Game forum how certain principles apply to/in Black contexts, is different from attempting to buttress (an essentially weak) argument by appealing to the moral authority of their ethnicity in one way or another.

“Obsidian Sure; but so what? If the facts stand, they stand, if not, they don’t. I just don’t get what all the handwringing and angst is all about; it’s like no one here has never encountered people who may not like Black folk or something before. Big deal! (this is assuming of course, that Murray and D’Souza in fact, don’t like Black folks; do you have any proof of this assertion”

CN: But this is the point that you’re missing. How can we say for sure if they are facts when maybe just maybe the authors allowed their biases to get the best of them.

O: Because so long as the acts of enough African Americans hang out there, and so long as there is no definitive answers one way or another insofar as the nature/nuture argument is concerned, people can and will lean to their own biases from which to base their own arguments.

“Obsidian Americans have the right to be biased. *shrugs*
Get over it.”

CN: Not when they are writing books with academic authority that they are hoping will used to shape public policy they don’t.

O: False. The First Amendment guarantees the right of The Bell Curve to be published and read, and as I have already noted, Murray has already influenced public policy with his previous work, Losing Ground, playing a major role in the crafting of Welfare Reform bills being passed – by a Democratic president who won virtually all of the Black Vote.

(He also signed into law the Crime Bill, which had profound impacts on lowering Black crime, and which was also widely supported by African Americans)

F: Now you’re talking. Cavalli-Sforza scientifically debunked the claims of people dabbling in his area of expertise. He never made any connection from genetics to social problems in urban areas in the USA. Others did.

O: Again, neither of the authors of The Bell Curve claimed to be geneticists, and The Bell Curve itself was a public policy argument. Which I see still has yet to be honestly addressed, more than 15 years later. Hmm…

F: So now you’re making a u-turn towards sociopolitical implications. Even more precisely just in the USA (5% of the world population).

O: I’ve only attempted to take on what The Bell Curve actually addresses, which isn’t genetics, but social questions and public policy that emanates from that.

In that you aren’t American, I can see why this would be of limited import to you.

actually, you dodged the question. If someone asked me about my political leanings and I said “American” that would be a dodge plain and simple. You could always just say “it’s none of your business” there is no reason to try to be slippery about it.

Hi Jason,
The sanctity of the voting booth is a deepy held notion in American life. Having said that, sure, I could have responded “none of your business”, but not only would that have been un-necessarily rude, it would not have been as informative into my thinking processes, which is what I interpreted your question as asking. I felt my response was informative in that way. Apparently, you disagree.

As for not being taken seriously, people are free to think whatever they wish.

Again, neither of the authors of The Bell Curve claimed to be geneticists, and The Bell Curve itself was a public policy argument. Which I see still has yet to be honestly addressed, more than 15 years later. Hmm…

So then what was the book that was completely devoted to debunking and picking apart The Bell Curve? Was that on your “list of dishonest attempts” to discuss this whole thing too, because it doesn’t reinforce your short sighted “Let us blacks all be labeled as stupid, so we can begin the healing process!” nonsense?

Now I see what everyone says about you when you repeat yourself. It was already established that the current aspects of Black Culture play a heavy role in the state of blacks in America. That should have ended the conversation with you ages ago, but for some reason…here you are still. I’m beginning to suspect that you’re still talking about it for some other deep seeded, high horse, reason.

SAT scores between blacks and whites have narrowed by 30% in the past 19 years. At that rate there will be almost no difference in 70 years. It is not as if they think the SAT is not a good rough measure of intelligence.

——-

On the long term trend NAEP, the difference
in black-white test scores narrowed significantly from 1973 to the late 1980s and then began widening again in the 1990s.

The improvement in black test scores to the the late 1980s can be explained by the improvement in the public school environment for blacks that followed school integration. The widening since the 1990s can be explained by the immutability of genetic differences.

Because there has not been a continuous trajectory upward in black scores since 1973 there is no reason to believe that there will be no difference 70 years from now.

I hope this is within blog rules. Just a few quotes from the book from about page 100 on. They claim:

In fact, IQ is substantially heritable. The state of knowledge does not permit a precise estimate, but half a century of work, now amounting to hundreds of empirical and theoretical studies, permits a broad conclusion that the genetic component of IQ is unlikely to be smaller than 40 percent or higher than 80 percent.

The remarkable part is how this “broad conclusion” is not confirmed by genetics themselves.

Nothing seems more fearsome to many commentators than the possibility that ethnic and race differences have any genetic component at all. This belief is a fundamental error.

And then they fail to come up with a clear genetic definition of those differences. They don’t even bother defining race scientifically and assume the vulgarised concept to be intuitive.

For purposes of this discussion, we will adopt a middling estimate of 60 percent heritability, which, by extension, means that IQ is about 40 percent a matter of environment. The balance of the evidence suggests that 60 percent may err on the low side.

etc…

The whole book is a mishmash of selectively picked data and literature from all sorts of disciplines, ignoring all scientific sources that contradict their ideology. If they have a political statement to make why all that deviation into areas they even admit they have no expertise in? Why don’t they say out loud what they really want to say?

@Ted
“the improvement in the public school environment for blacks that followed school integration.”

-According to you integration improved Black test scores. When you look outside do you honestly see a racially integrated school system?
-If your answer to that first question is no, do you believe more integration would help?
-If your answer to the second question is no, why not? What would be the difference between the first round of integration and the second that would yield different results?

Could you explain to us some of the sweeping changes in school environment for Blacks during that time(post integration)?

@Ted
“The widening since the 1990s can be explained by the immutability of genetic differences.”

-So what do you think about the number of 33% heritabilty of intelligence? Why do you disagree with this number?

-What do you think about Eric Turkheimer’s studies that showed heritability of only 10% for twins among the lower end of the economic spectrum living in chaotic enviroments?

“Until recently, Turkheimer and others said, research had indicated that the heritability of IQ—that is, the degree to which genes can explain the differences in IQ scores—completely dominated environmental influences.

But it turned out that virtually all those studies on the heritability of IQ had been done on middle-class and wealthy families. Only when Turkheimer tested that assumption in a population of poor and mostly black children did it become clear that, in fact, the influence of genes on IQ was significantly lower in conditions of poverty, where environmental deficits overwhelm genetic potential.

Specifically, the heritability of IQ at the low end of the wealth spectrum was just 0.10 on a scale of zero to one, while it was 0.72 for families of high socioeconomic status. Conversely, the importance of environmental influences on IQ was four times stronger in the poorest families than in the higher status families.”

My explanation was an attempt to explain the fact that black NAEP scores increased from 1973 to the late 1980s. I quoted a website from the liberal Brookings Institution, which claimed that, “On the long term trend NAEP, the difference in black-white test scores narrowed significantly from 1973 to the late 1980s and then began widening again in the 1990s.”

According to the libertarian Cato Institute, the decline in the race gap in NAEP scores was not significant:

“Figure 20.4 charts scores for black and white 17-year-olds on the three main NAEP tests (reading, mathematics, and science), to get an idea of changes in the racial achievement gap over time. As is evident from these
graphs, the overall gap remained essentially unchanged through 1980.

“That is 15 years after the passage of both the ESEA and Head Start, time enough for the children being tested to have passed through all these federal programs from preschool through the end of high school. Nevertheless, the gap had not narrowed.

“Then, across subjects, the racial achievement gap among 17-year-olds shrank in the early to mid-1980s. That trend subsequently ceased, and even reversed itself in the 1990s.

Oh and Cavalli-Sforza joined the chorus of leftists attacking the Bell Curve right around the time that his book reporting the results of his monumental research into The History and Geography of Human Genes was being published, in 1995.

The problem with Jewish stereotypes is that, well… they’re stereotypes! Most Jews are not rich, famous, super-smart, in Hollywood, or wear crazy black hats. But you never hear about the poor Jews, especially the poor Jews of Color who can’t even get Israeli citizenship most of the time.

Duuuhhhh.

Overlapping bell curves of IQ distribution. Which means there will be some not very intelligent Jews, and some very intelligent ssAfrican origin peoples.

Duuuuhhhhh.

Are you ignorant of how overlapping bell curves on a trait work? Or just hopeful that most of your commenter audience her is ignorant of that.

Frankly anyone who doesn’t really understand the statistical concept of overlapping bell curves can’t talk intelligently or with any real understanding in this area.

Oh and in America Episcopalians have about the same average IQ as Ashkenazi (the type we have in the US) Jews. About 110 in each case. You sometimes see a number as high as 115 for US Jews, but that’s not what the average of large sample size IQ tests have shown.

Another wrinkle with Ashkenazi Jews is that their IQ abilities are unusually distributed. They’re real high in verbal on average, but quite a bit poorer than the Euro average, as much as 7-8 IQ pts lower on visiospatial, which is also part of IQ tests. I’d guess the 115 number is derived form IQ tests or their proxies which are heavy on verbal and light on visiospatial, without having looked into that in detail.

“But I must you and Jason – so what? What difference does my political orientation, one way or another, make in the grand scheme of things? ”

sooooo this blog is the grand scheme of things? huh, I didn’t know that. Congratulations Abagond!

It only matters because I happen to find Libertarianism extremely childish wishful idealism that has nothing to do with reality. So now that I know this is the fount from which all your superficial rhetoric flows I can be quite secure in my decision to completely ignore everything you type from here on out. 🙂

O: I am sure you are aware of the fact that the blogosphere’s importance is now such that it can alter the course of presidential campaigns. Yes?

J: It only matters because I happen to find Libertarianism extremely childish wishful idealism that has nothing to do with reality. So now that I know this is the fount from which all your superficial rhetoric flows I can be quite secure in my decision to completely ignore everything you type from here on out.

O: LOL, what an irony. If you wanted to dismiss my views, you could have done so without recourse to inquiring into my political philosophy, Jason. Oh, and by the way – you have no idea what that actually is, or how I vote. And I actually share some of the same assessments about Libertarians as you do. That should give you a clue as to whether you think I am one or not.

Now then, how about you actually addressing what I said:

Do you agree or disagree that the US Constitution protects the right of bigots to BE bigots, or not?

I’m gonna co-sign what Abagond said. You didn’t make an argument, you just basically stated an opinion.

Fact is: I am right on this. You are wrong. Get over it.

Isolation in genetics DOES mean what I said. Ask anyone studying the field. Ask anyone with a degree in the subject. Isolation in genetics can only exist there is not even the POTENTIAL for interbreeding to occur.

And reproductive isolation DOES only work to create short-term changes in humans. Why? Because humans HAVE NEVER maintained a consistent pattern of mating along any culturally constructed demographic. Nor regional, or geographic, or climate-based. Humans, as a species, as stated ad infinitum in other posts, are more closely related on a species level than individuals who belong to the same nuclear family.

And your Freudian slip indicates you actually agree that HBDers ARE racist, only not like those other racists over at Stormfront. Y’know, the ones who financially support Steve Sailer and have him on their programs all the time.

So you’re not a libertarian. Was that so hard? jezus. This is what I’m telling you. If you can’t even answer a simple direct question with either “yes”, “no”, or “I don’t want to answer that” than why would anyone bother conversing with you? I won’t. You can’t be direct and therefor are a waste of time. end of.

And spare me the “oh I didn’t want to be rude” thing. We all know that’s a joke.

Seriously you should try being honest and direct. If nothing else it will spare you the case of carpal tunnel syndrome you have coming.

J: So you’re not a libertarian. Was that so hard? jezus. This is what I’m telling you. If you can’t even answer a simple direct question with either “yes”, “no”, or “I don’t want to answer that” than why would anyone bother conversing with you? I won’t. You can’t be direct and therefor are a waste of time. end of.

O: Actually, it wasn’t so very “hard” at all; but the reason why I am reluctant to go there is because I find people will attempt to take the personal and use that as a means toward discrediting the argument, and I don’t want you or anyone else to do that. I want you to focus like a laserbeam on the argument itself. Let’s try this again:

Does the US Constitution protect the right of people to be bigots? Yes or no?

Learn to seperate your personal feelings from the issues at hand, Jason. You’ll progress a lot faster that way when you do.

J: And spare me the “oh I didn’t want to be rude” thing. We all know that’s a joke.

O: No, it is not. I am not joking when I said that, nor am I joking now.

J: Seriously you should try being honest and direct. If nothing else it will spare you the case of carpal tunnel syndrome you have coming.

O: I was being honest – you should learn to put your personal feelings about what you think you know about your interlocutors and focus on the issues at hand. And your concern about my health, while flattering, is unwarranted; I’ve been typing in excess of 100 words a minute since the late 1990s (I taught myself how to type).

“but the reason why I am reluctant to go there is because I find people will attempt to take the personal and use that as a means toward discrediting the argument, ”

So just say you don’t want to answer. Again. you don’t read, and you’re not direct. You type and type and type but it’s all for nothing because you aren’t honest. you want to win and that’s all you care about. f*ck that i’m not interested.

“Does the US Constitution protect the right of people to be bigots? Yes or no? Learn to seperate your personal feelings from the issues at hand, Jason.”

dude. THAT IS NOT AN ISSUE AT HAND!

just because you brought it up that doesn’t mean anyone is obligated to talk about it with you. It has nothing to do with the OP.

for the record yes it would protect bigots as long as they don’t infringe on the rights of anyone as outlined in the constitution.

The fact that you think that is relevant to the discussion is in part what flagged you as a libertarian. Libertarian are always going on about the constitution like it’s ALL that matters. As if strict adherence to this holiest of documents will cure all of society’s ills.

I see you’ve made your point, again and again. It doesn’t mean I have to agree with it. You pretty much stated your stance on the conditions of the black community and some of the answers you’ve given to my questions help prove that. So, there’s no need to argue with someone who made up his or her mind.

I will say that it doesn’t mean that what you believe is the truth, but if that’s what you want to believe, go right ahead.

“which has to do with the very real fact that the cognitive elite is living a life more and more divorced from everyone else, particularly those who would be considered just a bit below average, and that we need to have an honest discussion as to what we do about all of that. Thus far, ideology has replaced clear headed discourse. ”

Jason,
Yes it is; it also must be noted that the report to which you refer was in fact written not by geneticists, but rather economists. Not to say that what they say isn’t legit, just wanted to point that out.

Are you suggesting that IQ is one, not heritable at all, and two, plays no role in one’s role in life?

The very first word out of your mouth in that comment was “Bullshite”. When I saw that I read no further and hit the Trash button.

Yeah sure you read no further. And besides what a weenie excuse. As if an intentionally misspelled “bullshite” is shockingly foul language. Get real. Most people on internet forums conducted at a high level don’t bother to intentionally misspell it, to lessen the faint taboo breaking.

Isolation in genetics can only exist there is not even the POTENTIAL for interbreeding to occur.

Complete and utter rubbish.

What you’re describing is total isolation, which is rare in potentially able to interbreed subdivisions within the same species.

Ask anyone studying the field. Ask anyone with a degree in the subject. Isolation in genetics can only exist there is not even the POTENTIAL for interbreeding to occur.

Again you demonstrate you don’t know what you’re talking about. I have talked to plenty of geneticists and evolutionary biologists. It’s biologists who mostly study this area — the effect of isolation on evolution. An no it’s often not total when significant phenotypic differences arise.

You make it sound like HBDers are not genuinely bigoted racists. Is that true? If so, what kind of racists are they? Or are they racist at all?

The vast majority true HBDers, that is people who’ve looked extensively at scientific evidence of racial differences and evidence that some of it might or probably does have genetic causes (but also environmental/cultural ones in a complex mix), are not true i.e. bigoted racists at all, no.

However when the left has expanded their definition of racism to include believing that there are any racial differences not caused by white racism which impede the ability of blacks or other lower performing groups to compete, on average, in America’s technological society, then yeah, all HBDers by this definition must be so called “racists”.

Of course it’s an absurdly expanded definition. Since it’s certainly possible, and by the evidence exceeding likely, that by this definition the truth is racist.

Definition of genetic isolation: “The absence of genetic exchange between populations or species as a result of geographic separation or of mechanisms that prevent reproduction.”

Yet we know that there has been genetic exchange between populations of humans, and we have traced this through mitochondrial DNA, and other gene markers, a la the Human Genome Project as well as other studies.

The problem in humans is that there is no completely isolated population of humans on an evolutionary timescale. Simply don’t exist. You keep saying, “Complete and utter rubbish” but I’m not sure if you realize that you’re not offering any kind of facts to back-up your statements. Especially when I increasingly confront you with data from the field, especially in physical anthropology.

But by all means Doug, continue in your attempts to actually make an argument. Y’know, instead of just flaming, trolling, and stating your opinions.

ot like those other racists over at Stormfront. Y’know, the ones who financially support Steve Sailer and have him on their programs all the time.

What garbage. Steve Sailer doesn’t speak on Stormfront forums.

And besides this is completely illegitimate refutation through guilt by association argument.

Abagond has attacked me for dismissing arguments due to the low level and high rigidity of the arguers apparent intellect, e.g. with (not so smart Jewish zek), but this is much worse. Much worse because while I was getting fed up with stupid and ill informed ideological arguments for rote fed zek, you’re just trying to refute by character assassination.

That doesn’t get to what the truth is at all (unlike my zings at zek), but rather to what you feel should be moral taboos.

Obsidian throws out Americans have the right to be biased. *shrugs*
Get over it.”

Chic Noir responds : Not when they are writing books with academic authority that they are hoping will used to shape public policy they don’t.

Obsidan final reply: False. The First Amendment guarantees the right of The Bell Curve to be published and read, and as I have already noted, Murray has already influenced public policy with his previous work, Losing Ground, playing a major role in the crafting of Welfare Reform bills being passed – by a Democratic president who won virtually all of the Black Vote.

Uncle Mu you answer did nothing to answer, demote, confirm or buttress my comment. People who shape public policy should not carry heavy biases.

I never argued that first amendment doesn’t protect the write of Murray to write and publish The Bell Curve, I have issue with Murray and other using such a book to shape public policy.

Really?? Because as I understand it, The Political Cesspool, a talk show that Sailer has been on has been broadcast by Stormfront Radio, which is a service of the Stormfront website.

And of course, there’s all the links to his articles which if you just use Google, all lead to Stormfront too.

Hmmm… ! Looks like you need to check your facts, again.

And it is perfectly legitimate to distrust your arguments based on racism and other forms of prejudice. Would you trust someone who’s color-blind on the redness of a rose?

But I also refute Steve Sailer because he’s not a geneticist or biologist or anthropologist. And neither are ANY of the darlings of HBD and race-realism.

The rest of your comment seems to basically say you’re angry (which is obvious) at being dismissed and attacked by myself and others for your views. Well, if you can’t stand the heat, then GTFO the kitchen. Don’t be a racist? Don’t say racist nonsense? And then I won’t call you out on it.

Oh, and you STILL haven’t provided any PROOF to your arguments other than conspiracy, conjecture, and opinion.

I have issue with Murray and other using such a book to shape public policy.

Chic,

I agree with ya on that point. Which is why I’m ALLLLL about refuting the science behind their work, because that’s going to have a direct impact on removing their influence on public policy decisions.

First of all, you are the one who goes into “Misunderstood Martyr Mode” when anyone questions your logic that supports the Bell Curve. My opinion of you isn’t simplistic, your views in their entirety are. Don’t confuse your 1st Grade Crayola Painting with the Mona Lisa. You’re not as deep or as clever as you try to make yourself out to be. It’s quite obvious what your views are, because you have constantly hinted that “The moment blacks stop worrying about our sensibilities and about being proven as less intelligent, that we can work on our issues. So stop fighting this people and accept it so we can move forward!” Like I said, that’s just short sighted foolishness. You also say that you wish to discuss how genetics MAY come into play with black issues, but then you are vehemently against facts and research that say other wise. And yet, you somehow have the gall to accuse ME of being disingenuous? Please…

C’mon son…

Second of all, that was a “clever” attempt to disregard the obvious cultural reason for the lack of black mobility; which you “slyly” tried to equate with slavery. Ever since the rebellious counter culture hit the late 60’s/early 70’s (that glorified infidelity and irresponsibility) these serious “black problems” seemed to begin. And no, I’m not saying that there wasn’t one single problem in our community before then. So don’t knee-jerk and try to accuse me of saying that.

I agree with ya on that point. Which is why I’m ALLLLL about refuting the science behind their work, because that’s going to have a direct impact on removing their influence on public policy decisions.

Relative isolation would increase the timeline exponentially for the kind of fundamental IQ differences ya’ll keep mentioning. More importantly, skull-size has eff-all to do with intelligence. Cephalic indices only tell you the shape of someone’s head, not cranial capacity, and not even cranial capacity can predict intelligence. That idea has been debunked for decades.

You are AGAIN making the mistake that physiological differences are markers for genetic-based IQ differences, except that they AREN’T. Physiology is malleable, as in partially affected by the environment. Yet I will admit that physiology is affected by genes as well, but it still has nothing to do with a population/individual’s potential intelligence.

Let me put it straight: nobody in the field is saying that humans don’t have physiological variation that we use as part of the definition for “race” that is often rooted in geographical regions. But race is not an absolute, like height, or weight, that can be measured or scientifically defined in humans. That’s the score, and it ain’t changing.

Doug1 and all other racists, I will now bring down my technological cyber anti-racist wrath upon you (metaphorically of course)–meaning I have the power to refute your bigoted opinions! Unbeknownst to everyone, I have a secret weapon. Take this!

“I have issue with Murray and other using such a book to shape public policy.”

Z: Chic,

I agree with ya on that point. Which is why I’m ALLLLL about refuting the science behind their work, because that’s going to have a direct impact on removing their influence on public policy decisions.

Plus I’m good at it ; )

O: There is room for improvement I see; Murray has already influenced public policy; his book Losing Ground was the basis of the eventual passage of Welfare Reform.

Serpentus,
Please explain how “environmental factors” account for john Ogbu’s studies and findings on the children of Black middle and upper middle class families still scoring lower on tests than poorer Whites and Asians? Thanks.

F: First of all, you are the one who goes into “Misunderstood Martyr Mode” when anyone questions your logic that supports the Bell Curve.

O: I support the idea of giving its central arguments a fair hearing which has yet to actually happen in this forum.

F: My opinion of you isn’t simplistic, your views in their entirety are. Don’t confuse your 1st Grade Crayola Painting with the Mona Lisa. You’re not as deep or as clever as you try to make yourself out to be. It’s quite obvious what your views are, because you have constantly hinted that “The moment blacks stop worrying about our sensibilities and about being proven as less intelligent, that we can work on our issues. So stop fighting this people and accept it so we can move forward!” Like I said, that’s just short sighted foolishness.

O: Why?

F: You also say that you wish to discuss how genetics MAY come into play with black issues, but then you are vehemently against facts and research that say other wise. And yet, you somehow have the gall to accuse ME of being disingenuous? Please…

O: I have said twice already, and this comment makes the third time, that I have no problem with scholars like Cavalli-Sforza taking scholarly issue with The Bell Curve. That’s what academics do, they hash ideas and arguments out, and I am perfectly cool with that. My interest and concern insofar as TBC is concerned, is with the social and potential public policy arguments it puts forth. Which again, I have noted no one here has actually addressed. Hmm.

F: C’mon son…

O: Where are we going?

F: Second of all, that was a “clever” attempt to disregard the obvious cultural reason for the lack of black mobility; which you “slyly” tried to equate with slavery.

O: ???

F: Ever since the rebellious counter culture hit the late 60′s/early 70′s (that glorified infidelity and irresponsibility) these serious “black problems” seemed to begin. And no, I’m not saying that there wasn’t one single problem in our community before then. So don’t knee-jerk and try to accuse me of saying that.

O: OK; but I think it is important to point out that the Great Society programs of the 60s had a major impact on Black life and not for the better either.

**Please explain how “environmental factors” account for john Ogbu’s studies and findings on the children of Black middle and upper middle class families still scoring lower on tests than poorer Whites and Asians?**

Serpentus replies:

“In his study, Ogbu explains the Black-White achievement gap as one born from the cultural attitudes held by Black middle-class students toward academics.”

“You’re not as deep or as clever as you try to make yourself out to be.”

I think this is his main problem. Just look at his comments. I actually think it’s quite amazing he can waste so much space talking about absolutely nothing. I have not witnessed a single comment from him about directly related to the subject matter of the post.

When I asked him questions concerning the topic all he could say was

no
no
no

(ironic that all the short replies were to relevant questions) and than go back off-topic screaming about bifurcated societies and Bill Cosby.

It’s like the blog version of the crazy old bum shouting about his ever-so important NONSENSE.

Uncle MuBut so long as there are human beings, they will be biased, Chic. To expect otherwise is to deny that which makes us human.

*le sigh*

Uncle Mu, of course all human beings have biases but they can’t be overreaching. I sure you get this. So why are you being so difficult. I’m sure you know that one way the Republicans where trying to hold the nomination of Justice Sotomyer was because of her “Wise Latina” comment.

CN: Uncle Mu, of course all human beings have biases but they can’t be overreaching. I sure you get this. So why are you being so difficult. I’m sure you know that one way the Republicans where trying to hold the nomination of Justice Sotomyer was because of her “Wise Latina” comment.

O: Oh, you mean in the same way the Dems held up Judge Bork’s confirmation? Like that?

Plus, while we’re on the Ogbu argument, I am having a lot of trouble buying into this notion that doing well in school, being intellecually curious and so forth, is tantamount to “trying to act White”. I just don’t see many Black people, for example, associating Malcolm X or MLK with trying to be White – or Barack Obama for that matter. And that’s just for starters.

That and a few other things, has me giving Ogbu’s arguments the side eye…

Obsidian: Please explain how “environmental factors” account for john Ogbu’s studies and findings on the children of Black middle and upper middle class families still scoring lower on tests than poorer Whites and Asians? Thanks.

The point I was making with the Australian aborigines & the visual cortex. On average this is substantially larger (about 25%) than it is for europeans. And they also have significantly higher visual memory abilities, even when raised urban settings.

So you have a pretty clear example of relative isolation and a group developing a particular mental ability in response to their environment.

The reference is to research by a pathologist, Clive Harper in an article in the Sunday Telegraph. There is a study with pretty small sample sizes which Harper was a co-author of, but I’ve only seen the abstract.

Hmm, I’m looking at the article and I’m confused as how a pathologist (someone specializing in diseases) is qualified to talk about genetics and intelligence.

That said, I’ve no doubt the study is accurate on what it reported, but I’d chalk it up to phenotypic plasticity, much the same way that multi-lingual Europeans have more highly developed language centers than Americans, despite having similar ancestry.

Or take for instance an opposite example, when Europeans raised in an aboriginal society — same diet, same culture, everything — they develop a jaw structure shockingly similar to aboriginal’s jaw structure, due to eating the same diet.

I will give you this though Schwartz, that was the best example you’ve come up with yet! Haha.

much the same way that multi-lingual Europeans have more highly developed language centers than Americans, despite having similar ancestry.

Interesting you mention that. You can find the same phenomenon in many Africans who speak at least two languages, mostly even languages that don’t have any common roots. It is shown that bilingual individuals have more ease in learning a third or fourth language than monolingual speakers.

I remember from my German classes that the African students (mostly from the francophonie who also speak their local ethnic language) absorbed German much quicker than Anglophones and Japanese for instance.

“Rice, Cloninger and Reich (1980) showed that correlational data on American IQ is consistent with a rather low genetic and cultural heritability. Here we confirm their general results with a more parsimonious model. From phenotypic data alone the estimates of genetic and cultural heritability are 0.31 and 0.42, respectively. “

I’m still not getting what the big deal here is. So what if Black folks don’t turn out a bunch of Nobel prize winners in physics or something? The main deal is what I posted above from another forum, which was in actual response to my question – what do we do with the people who are left out of the global market? Many of whom will be Black? That to me is a far more profound question, than bickering over which methodoology is more sound, etc et al. Simply put, everyone will NOT be born an Einstein, and it only makes sense to me that part of the reason for that is genetic. How much, to what extent, who knows, that’s a matter still very much up for debate. In the meantime though, we are not serving the needs of the many, we are in an age where only the relative few actually make out and it is not only unfair, it is also deeply unAmerican. Why can’t we simply focus on that? Are we so wedded to ideology here, that we can’t even deal with practical issues on the ground?

The argument isn’t that blacks simply aren’t harnessing natural genius levels of intelligence. That’s just foolish hyperbole. (Watch you try to backpedal and say that “you didn’t mean it that way” now…) HBD’ers are saying that blacks all over the world, on average are barely above (and some groups at/below the level of) mental retardation. The same people are opting to treat blacks as nothing more than children once this is “proven”, as “we (blacks) just can’t help it”. Despite the proof that states otherwise.

Your “Hey guys! Let’s turn the other cheek and let them do what they want!” nonsense has never worked in the past, when dealing with white ignorance, and it won’t work now. This should be common sense to anyone with even the most pedestrian level of knowledge when it comes to Black American history. You don’t leave a stain on your rug, you try to get it up as quickly as possible, lest you actually desire a bigger pain in the future.

“So what if Black folks don’t turn out a bunch of Nobel prize winners in physics or something?”

if that’s true than it’s cultural. Black people are just as capable as anyone else. Any lack of achievement is environmental in origin not genetic. It’s quite obvious to me that most BP grow up in an environment that is very, very different from most whites. That environmental difference is far greater than any genetic difference and environment can be changed more quickly and easily than genes can. So focusing on genetics is illogical in my view. Let’s change the environment and after we do that if there is still a big difference than you can all say “I told you so. it’s in the genes!”

F: That’s just foolish hyperbole. (Watch you try to backpedal and say that “you didn’t mean it that way” now…)

O: ???

F: HBD’ers are saying that blacks all over the world, on average are barely above (and some groups at/below the level of) mental retardation. The same people are opting to treat blacks as nothing more than children once this is “proven”, as “we (blacks) just can’t help it”. Despite the proof that states otherwise.

O: So what? Aren’t the HBDers entitled to their opinion? As for their desires to shape public policy, it would have to comport with the Constitution. Welfare Reform was in line with that. Increased racial profiling (see Levin, Why Race Matters) on the other hand, does not.

F: Your “Hey guys! Let’s turn the other cheek and let them do what they want!” nonsense has never worked in the past, when dealing with white ignorance, and it won’t work now.

O: Strawman.

F: This should be common sense to anyone with even the most pedestrian level of knowledge when it comes to Black American history. You don’t leave a stain on your rug, you try to get it up as quickly as possible, lest you actually desire a bigger pain in the future.

O: Nonsensical.

When you can actually form a cogent argument to respond to my or the other commenter’s points I posted yesterday, feel free.:)

Ababond this series of posts continues to be fascinating and informative. Mostly your posts are formalizing and confirming what I’ve always sensed, at an intuitive level, was the case. The one piece that continues to gnaw at me, though, is: “what does ‘IQ’ actually measure?” It does not feel like it measures “intelligence” from any real-life useful sense. Again, my reasoning and analysis are more numinent than rational, but there are anecdotal toeholds. For example, most MENSA members I have encountered in real life are idiots when it comes to practical real life skills. Conversely, people living in abject poverty in third world countries devise almost unbelievably complex ways of eking out an existence, and some modicum of dignity, in the midst of dehumanizing conditions. This requires a deep level of intelligence.

I wonder about that too. It certainly does not test intelligence in the way ordinary people understand it. I am beginning to wonder if most of what it tests is the ability to take tests and process paperwork quickly. Which would correlate well with school success and even success in many middle-class jobs.

Arthur Jensen says that IQ correlates well with reaction time. The Pioneer Fund, therefore, wants to test people worldwide for reaction time – something that seems simple to test in a culture-free way.

Their thinking is that the North Eurasian brain runs faster than the tropical brain. Cavalli-Sforza says that intelligence is not based on speed – we are not simply apes who think faster. Speed is merely a quantitative, not a qualitative, difference.

But since there is a time limit on IQ tests, it stands to reason that it would correlate with reaction time to some degree. African children, and no doubt most people, do much better on IQ tests when there is no time limit. That level of intelligence is not part of the scores.

I think you can safely trust your intuition on this one. “Hard” science is often counter-intuitive but since stuff like the Bell Curve belongs largely to the realm of pseudo science, intuition (not to forget personal observation) is always an option.

The ingenuity and improvisation talents – what we call “système D” in French – is sometimes outright staggering in many parts of Africa. I’ve seen a guy operating a sowing machine made out of bicycle parts and metal scrap, oiled with good old red palm oil, working like a champ. 40 year old cars falling apart, put back into function basically with metal scrap. The most amazing pieces of art made out of all sorts of recycled stuff. Music made with DIY instruments that have such a rich sound you wouldn’t believe the parts never had anything to do with music. etc etc

When I was in Douala just recently, I was beaten in chess twice in a few minutes by a couple of street boys, not older than 14, on a DIY chess game with all the figures carved from all sorts of wood. I consider myself a decent chess player. It was embarrassing. I had been warned by my cousin when those boys lured me in… 😉

Then there were these boys playing football and from time to time one of them would go to the sideline and scribble something in the soil. It looked like encrypted letters and numbers to me. I asked him and he said, that’s just statistics about goals, corner kicks, fouls, offsides, who the player was etc. He saw that on telly during the world cup so he thought perhaps his team can improve their game if he keeps track of everything. I said, well tomorrow it’ll be all erased from the soil. He said, no problem monsieur, I will have it all in my head. I’ll write it down on paper at school tomorrow morning. The only pen we had at home broke…

The most amazing story was with my cousin’s neighbour’s kids and the binary system when they asked me how a computer works. But that’s a long story.

“Then there were these boys playing football and from time to time one of them would go to the sideline and scribble something in the soil. It looked like encrypted letters and numbers to me. I asked him and he said, that’s just statistics about goals, corner kicks, fouls, offsides, who the player was etc. He saw that on telly during the world cup so he thought perhaps his team can improve their game if he keeps track of everything.”

There is a long tradition of intelligent thinking in Africa (as elsewhere) but it often goes unrecognized when first viewed through a Western, mindset.

“Murray and Herrnstein said that IQ is about 60% genetic. That was the best value as of 1976. Since then several important papers, particularly Rice, Cloninger and Reich (1980), have come out showing that the true number is about 33%.”

Abagond,

Are you kidding? This is 2011. Why are you citing research that’s over 30 years old?

Let me break this down for you:

IQ and heritability

1. Within races, the heritability (h^2 or proportion of variance explained by genes) of general intelligence (g) increases with age. At age 1, it’s around 0. By adulthood it’s around 0.8. (At least in Japan, China, India, Europe, the US, Australia, and other areas were estimates have been made.)

2. Heritability concerns population variance (relative differences) and not absolute differences. Mean population height or IQ or whatever can increase all it wants without affecting heritability, since the relative difference remains.

Race and IQ

3. Murray and Herrnstein said that is “likely” the difference in IQs between blacks and whites is *partially* genetic.

4. There is nothing strange about what they said. In 1969, Jensen hypothesized a *mostly* genotypic IQ gap of .5 to .75 SD. The current adult gap is 1.1 SD. The SAT gap in 2010 was 1 SD. There is quite a ways to go before Jensen’s mostly and Murray and Herrnstein’s partially are falsified.

5. Sandra Scarr’s adoption study clearly supported at least a partial genetic interpretations for the US B-W difference; she said so herself. Barbara Tizard’s study did not involved African Americans. Moreover, the various Africanish kids were 3 and 1/2. Genotypic IQ expresses itself with age — so that finding was meaningless.

Obsidian is an interesting cat. Very persistent, convinced, and obsessive really about making his point. One has to wonder: why is this issue so important to him or her? What does it prove for him/her in his life.

What is fundamentally ignored by people like Obsidian is this: race is a myth. We appear to be racially groupified but it is abitrary, there is no “race” – we are simply offspring of one race of people who divided over time into various mutations if you will. So on its face any studies of race are garbage for race does not exist.

Also Obsidian is not atuned to “spriritual intelligence”. A poor black refugee child in Darfur may not know square roots but he may be atuned to some spiritual life that allows him to live 2 weeks without food, water or shelter. He may also die a happy person, at peace in some way that a PhD may never. And so may be able to quote Kafka but in the end does it prevent you from dying of cancer, or being hit by a truck tomorrow or die in an earthquake? In the end, what is this intelligence worth when you are standing peacefully on a street corner and a drunk driver runs you over? It seems to me the way you live spiritually is infinitely more precious than what you do because then we can process a poor child – a really smart child – dying of leukemia more easily and we can understand intelligence does not cure leukemia nor does it stops earthquakes.